Lestat? — Page 2

btw looking at your sig, the show ended on May 28th not the 29th.

---

My barf bucket is right next to the PC so I'll be OK. In the meantime, let's take a look back at the most dreadful show of all time!





The vampire Lestat has settled in San Francisco. And he's singing in a new musical. Quick! Someone fetch the garlic and a wooden stake!

Lestat: Musical. Book by Linda Woolverton, adapted from Anne Rice’s "The Vampire Chronicles." Music by Elton John. Lyrics by Bernie Taupin. Directed by Robert Jess Roth. (Through Jan. 29. Curran Theatre, 445 Geary St., San Francisco. Two hours, 40 minutes. Tickets $30-$90. Call (415) 512-7770 or visit www.shnsf.com).



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The creatures of Anne Rice's "The Vampire Chronicles" have survived many things -- fire, famine, dismemberment, even a couple of regrettable Hollywood movies. Whether they can survive "Lestat," the Broadway-bound musical at the Curran Theatre, is more open to question.

Didactic, disjointed, oddly miscast, confusingly designed and floundering in an almost unrelentingly saccharine score by Elton John, "Lestat" opened Sunday as the latest ill-conceived Broadway hopeful in the Best of Broadway series (following on the heels of "Lennon" and "Mambo Kings"). It's the first stage production of the new Warner Bros. Theatre Ventures, and if that sounds as if Bugs Bunny's company is trying to follow in the footsteps of Mickey Mouse, it's no accident.

"Lestat" was put together by director Robert Jess Roth, who staged Disney's first theatrical venture, "Beauty and the Beast," now in its 12th year on Broadway. Linda Woolverton, who wrote the book, adapted "Beauty" from her own Disney screenplay. John, who composed the score for Disney's animated hit "The Lion King," did the same for the vapid Disney musical "Aida." But where "Aida" can be enjoyed for its excessive bad taste, "Lestat," for the most part, is simply not quite undead.

There may still be time to breathe some life into it before its scheduled April opening at New York's Palace Theatre. The world-premiere run at the Curran is a shakedown cruise, after all. But "Lestat" has been in previews since Dec. 17, during which one major supporting actor has been dismissed and presumably other changes have been made. It needs much more work.

Part of the problem may be the source. "Lestat" is adapted from the first two books of "The Vampire Chronicles" -- 1976's "Interview With the Vampire" and 1985's "The Vampire Lestat" -- which offer very different, often conflicting versions of three key characters. Woolverton and lyricist Bernie Taupin, John's longtime pop song collaborator, have to make those characters consistent and create a unified tone for the narrative. They're also busy -- very busy -- trying to cram as many incidents and as much information from both books into one libretto as possible.

It's too much story, with the authors almost desperately shoehorning some of Rice's plot turns, narrative flights and interminable vampire creation myths into a song here, an overstuffed confrontation there or the large-scale video animation sequences that blanket the set. The characters prove even more problematic, but then, despite her creative departures from Rice's novels, very few of the figures in Woolverton's script have much character.

Of the three who inhabit both books, Louis -- the narrator of "Interview" (which makes up most of the second act) -- is a peripheral, one-dimensional image of unrelieved angst, strongly sung by Jim Stanek. Armand, very capably performed by an enigmatically commanding Drew Sarich (the understudy for the departed Jack Noseworthy), is pretty much the fundamentalist villain he'd become in the second book. Lestat, the uncommunicative dark menace of the first book, is much more the interminably loquacious, questing vampire of the sequel.

He's the narrator of his own story, the narrative popping up on the scrim as he types his tale on a laptop -- a device that grows old very fast. As he narrates, the scene shifts from a modern office to the 18th French century estate where he was raised; to Paris, where he becomes an actor and a vampire, turns his mother and his best friend into vampires in turn, confronts Armand and leaves on his quest for deep knowledge; and eventually (we're in the second act now) settles in New Orleans, where he makes the vampires Louis and, Rice's most intriguing invention, the child vampire Claudia.

A vivid array of scenic projections -- gothic interiors, deep forests, Parisian and New Orleans cityscapes -- upholster the large moving flats and arches of Derek McLane's inventive sets (the visual concept is by graphic-novel artist Dave McKean, with sculptural lighting by Kenneth Posner). Hyperactive animation sequences less successfully serve as special effects for the battle with wolves and bloodsucking episodes. Susan Hilferty's costumes -- vivid and ghostly, historical or wildly imaginative -- help keep us apprised of where we are and when.

None of this matters much, though, unless Lestat is endlessly fascinating, which is another problem. Woolverton and Taupin have had to truncate so much story that they've barely sketched in the main character. Hugh Panaro, who plays the role, is tall, reasonably dashing and sings with a big, powerful voice, but seems lost in his long stretches of dialogue. His speech is rhythmic and unconvincing, which is all the more bothersome given Woolverton's only partial success in enlivening Rice's clunky dialogue. Nor does it help that Panaro's acting seems to consist of knitting his brows to indicate fear, confusion, anger, remorse, thirst, joy or pain.

A vibrant Carolee Carmello enlivens the stage as Lestat's mother, Gabrielle, infusing the role with great reservoirs of strength as a dying elder and wonderfully feral enthusiasm as a vampire. She exhibits a stunning range and force on her solo "Nothing Here," persuading her son to leave for Paris, and sings with great power of the thrill of the hunt in the overblown "The Crimson Kiss." But Gabrielle's stage time is too brief. Too much of the first act consists of Panaro and an attractive Roderick Hill, as best friend Nicolas, looking uncomfortable trying to figure out how homoerotic their friendship is supposed to be.

Some beautifully staged shadow-play theater bits and a masque of vampire ancient history (musical stagings by Matt West) add a bit of spice.

Things pick up briefly in the second act with the arrival of Allison Fischer's eerie child, Claudia, especially with her country-rock warbled "I Want More" -- but little of her story is left, and her other big solo, "I'll Never Have That Chance," is one of John's most cloyingly syrupy concoctions. A solid-looking Michael Genet is unconvincing as the sage Marius. The chorus and orchestra perform flawlessly under Brad Haak's musical direction.

The songs, however, range from mildly interesting to, for the most part, banal and virtually undistinguishable. Taupin's lyrics are often woodenly prosaic and rarely advance the story or our understanding of the characters. When he tries to cram information into a song, as in the tale of vampire creation, "The Origin of the Species," the result is simply confusing. John seems to spend most of the evening trying to become Andrew Lloyd Webber at his most vapid and pretentious.

It's the finale that hits rock bottom. Woolverton, Taupin and John try to sum up vampire wisdom in a resolution that reunites everybody in loving-kindness. Perhaps because of Rice's recent reconversion to Catholicism, though, they don't want to get into the flirtations with atheism and heartfelt Mother Earth worship of the "Lestat" novel. What we're left with is pure bland schmaltz. For vampires, frankly, that sucks.

---

"The people on my old Wicked forum had more respect for people. Why don't you guys have any respect for what others like and don't like. "

Those message boards are more friendlier because you people all like the same thing. This is a Broadway in General Board. Everyone's taste's vary.

Like I DON'T Like Chaperone and the movie of Dreamgirls and some people here might but I respect them."

Drowsy is still running and doing very well. Dreamgirls is a very successful movie. While, Lestat ran for about a month.

Updated On: 1/20/07 at 08:53 PM

"So know this, that saying lestat was good or starting any thread about wicked, High school musical or SA. WILL end up in you getting bashed."

SA doesn't get bashed.

BroadwayBaby, if a show is a flop then anyone has every right to say it sucked. the fact it floped only proved stronger that it in deed sucked.

first of all winston, the length of a show's running time has no justification for if it was a good or bad piece of musical theater. Good or bad are called OPINIONS and it is the opinion of the audience which determines the length of the running time, the running time does not determine the opinion of the audience. it is the audience member who determines if they think it was a good or bad show, the running time does not, and SHOULD NOT, immediately whisper to people in their ears "hey, this thing sucked!" That's a terrible thing to say.....

the fact that a show closed quickly does not prove that a show, as you so eloquently put it "sucked"

Merrily has been touted as a masterpiece and certainly flopped.

What it does prove to me is that the show was not popular.
There are many reasons that a show would fold quickly.

Often bad press can kill a show before it steps foot in New York, with the quickly closing of Dracula, the musical and Dance of the Vampires before it, it certainly didn't have a lot going for it to begin with.

I remember speaking to a lot of the technical people and some of the actors when they were moving in (I live right next door) and they told me that the press had been absolutely vicious, some of whom who didnt even stay throughout the show.

Now its one thing to walk out if you've paid and youre now reviewing, but if you're reviewing, I think its an obligation that you see the whole thing.

but regardless, a show closing quickly does not mean the show was inherently bad.

I could name many other shows that suffered the same fate and have endured
many Sondheim shows: Anyone can Whistle, debatably Follies, etc.

---

Thank you fenchurch!!!

I've seen schmootpegs (you know what it rhymes with). It needed infinity revisions. The book lacked coherence. The score sounded generic at best. Its biggest strength was Drew Sarich, who I felt should've been nominated for a Tony.

---

I thikn the problem with Lestat was it took an incredibly dark story, which was not brought to stage correctly, and had a score written by a pop star, thus giving it a pop-esque score. The two simply dont mesh. It clashes and therefore kills. Good concept in my opinion, fantastic concept actually, incredibly talented cast, the music on its own isnt even that bad, but unfortunately they were just working together. I think with some serious revisions and a score with much darker qualities, it could of been a fantastic show.

Agree with Mattbrain about Drew. So much of the creative process was made up of missed opportunities -- but the strongest part of the show was the cast, and the strongest part of the cast was Drew.

---

Broadway Baby4- OMG u are totally right bout LESTAT!!!! IT WAS AMAZING! OMG YOU MET CAROLEE CARMEL? HOW WAS SHE! I LOVED IT! I LOVE HER?!!?! OMG oyu are soossoosososososoososososososoos lucky!!!!! I hate you JK I really love you but OMG!