Just watched the HOW TO SUCCEED preview video, and ... — Page 2

Sssshh! Don't say anything! You'll spoil his master plan!

*does a bunch of incomprehensible stretches that have no relation to what's going on*

His choreography for PROMISES and SUCCEED was/is perpetual motion machines of mediocrity and misguided ideas. I can't take another moment of female dancers doing spread eagles and somehow ending up with their legs wrapping the male dancer's heads in some variation of a vice grip hold. Or the retreaded kaleidoscopic merry go rounds of dancers making a big circle (again with the women doing #17...the spread eagle). His choreography would be more appropriate for WWE, cheerleading, and/or fitness competitions.

PJ, I agree with your assessment of today's "state of the union" with Broadway choreography.

But I can't believe there's not better ... no, wait ... I KNOW there's better choreography going on outside of NY than what I see with Ashford's or Marshall's on the boards. I think this is more of a political issue, because the stakes are so high financially on Broadway. They go with what they know because they're scared not to.

Producers aren't willing to try some stock or regional choreographer that is tearing the roof off regularly in another state.

And I still think Susan Stroman can be brilliant, if they want to go with the "known." I wish she would partner up with Scott Ellis again and focus on choreography. Let him direct. She's a potential "legend" in the making, and she understands how to build a number narratively, how to focus it, and how to make dancers "act" while they do steps. Her concepts evolve naturally out of the material, they don't fight it every (time) step of the way.

---

^ We're definitely on the same page, Katurian2!

---

Ashford's dances, for all their intensity, never deliver a big payoff and they rarely have any real relationship to the scene at hand. Surely, dance is an abstract art form, but watching the dancers in "How to..." and "Promises, Promises" I kept asking myself "what the hell are they doing?".
I did see the show, by the way.
Best12, you are absolutely right, he's the M. Night Shamalan of Broadway. When will someone finally declare the emperor has no clothes?... I think that will happen when the reviews for this show come out.

OMG, I'm so glad to read best12bars comments and I reacted to the video in the exact same way. The numbers are exhausting and they don't seem driven by character, especially Finch. The choreography seems like it was created after he was told how many choral numbers there would be, but before he actually heard any of the songs. Poor Daniel Radcliffe seems like he's trying desperately to keep up with the men instead of LEADING them. It doesn't appear either that Ashford has found a way to make “How to Succeed...” seem somewhat relevant today. When it premiered in 1961, people recognized these characters and their issues. The only irony I detected was when the mail room guy sings in “The Company Way,” “while others come and go, here I'll stay.” We all know that myth is no longer true. I can't see that theatergoers, especially younger ones, are going to “get” this piece, at least not from the way Ashford has handled (mishandled) it.

One poster defending Rob Ashford's work, commented that if Ashford were so bad then why would audiences be flocking to his shows? Easy answer: Daniel Radcliffe, Sean Hayes, Kristin Chenoweth. Also, keep in mind that the producers were very confident about “Promises,” until “La Cage” open and won raves. They assumed that show was their biggest competition for the Best Revival Tony Award, but in the end “Promises” didn't even garner a nomination. If “Promises” was much like what this “Succeed” video looks like, I can understand why.

Susan Stroman wants her dancers to think of themselves more as actors, and well, we see the results.

Ashford's group just screams: "We're dancers -- ONLY!"

"I was disheartened to read that several younger posters here said they didn't think the score was all that good when they saw the show. Or it wasn't memorable, etc"

That'd be me. LOL!

---

Yeah, my first thought when watching the video was "why is there so much going on in the choreography?" It's nice to look at, but what's the point?
I don't fancy myself an expert on choreography, but I thought Stroman's work in Oklahoma! (particularly the Dream Ballet) and Kathleen Marshall's work in KM,K (especially Too Darn Hot) was brilliant.

If you put out a 13 min video with huge chunks of "choreography", I don't see why people are being chastised for commenting on them. That video shows right from the begining of the HOW TO... number that the dancers are not even a part of the number, they seem to be trying to keep their balance while doing strange things with their arms. And as some have stated the dancing seems to be winding Daniel and others in the cast. And the comment about Hanke's Frump being sexy says so much about how badly this role (and Smitty) have been cast. Why the hell isn't Tyler Maynard playing Frump? I mean, he is Frump (the name Frump alone tells you Hanke is dead wrong.).
I shutter to think what Ashford will do with Evita's choreography, Argentinian soccer players will dance to DON'T CRY FOR ME...
I'm not surprised that LEAP OF FAITH is BASICALLY DEAD mostly due to Ashford's poor showing in LA.

I do agree about Frump. He's a Frump? Didn't they get that?
Reminds me of seeing The Full Monty in London with a bunch of really buff, good looking guys. Even the guy playing the "fat one" seemed to only have some minor love handles and maybe a 35 inch waist. Is there some aversion to casting people who look like their characters when they aren't supposed to be gorgeous?

LOL

Considering the original was played by Charles Nelson Reilly, who won a Tony for his performance, I'd say they're off the beaten path here.

---

yes

Mr. Radcliff looks like a child next to all of the men.

---