Licensed shows...a big debate

[SuperSchubert]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 12:07am

I was reading a thread on All That Chat West Coast about a production of Assassins being scolded by Sondheim for throwing in an intermission and cutting one of the songs in the score. The company immediately cut the intermission and reinstated the song.

That thread got me to thinking. Have any of you ever been to a production—community, regional, college, high school— licensed by MTI or Samuel French that was obviously in violation of the ‘you shall not change this show’ clause (i.e. music, dialogue, lyrics) in the contract?

Back in June, I saw a live production of Gypsy put on by a very known professional (and Equity) regional theatre in St. Louis. Having done musical direction/conducting for the show in a different production, I know Arthur Laurents’ book inside and out. So, it was a big surprise to me that in this particular production, there were several (and I mean several) lines added to the scenes. Worse yet, they were lifted straight from the script of the 1962 film. To me, that seems to show a lack of faith—on the part of the director—in the original material. It’s as if Laurents’ book wasn’t good enough. (I guess it doesn’t help that I really despise the movie on the whole.)

However…on the other hand, sometimes you just look at the licensed version of Gypsy and you wonder why a big climactic part of the show that is supposed to be this grand transformation of the title character appears so “white bread” in the provided materials. I’m speaking, of course, of the strip sequence. There’s no way for Louise to banter with the audience…all that is implied in the script is just Louise strutting around, doing her strip routine, and singing “Let Me Entertain You” to cap the thing off. Back when I was involved with a production of Gypsy, I remember the director, choreographer and I looking at ways to give Louise some “banter” lines that would go well with the costumes for the four different ‘strips’ in the sequence. Technically, we shouldn’t have done that, but we figured that those changes were so slight that it wasn’t a horribly bad change to the show. The music wasn’t changed one bit, save for some repeats and momentary drum fills for the ‘strip’ routines. What do you think Arthur Laurents would say? He mentions that over the years of revivals, the ‘strip’ evolved from its original form in 1959.

Sometimes I wonder what the rules are for making a show shorter? I certainly remember cutting the Entr'acte to the second act of Gypsy to save time. Is that considered altering the show?

Something tells me that what the company in St. Louis did to the script is far worse than the minor changes made by the organization I was involved with.

-SuperSchubert Updated On: 7/14/04 at 12:07 AM

[BWayBoy88]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 12:13am

I saw a production of Sound of Music where they replaced some songs with the songs from the movie. Instead of Maria singin Favorite Things on the way to the Von Trapps, as it is in the script, they had her singing I Have Confidence, which was added for the movie. They had the Captain and Maria singing Something Good instead of the song that is from the show. I dont know if they got permission from R&H or not, but I liked this better than the way the show was written.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 12:34am

Ummm.... yes. I saw a peticularly awful production of Peter Pan put on by the spreckles theatre here in San Diego. I don't know if there is a costume and sets clause in the contract, but there should be cuz', damn. In addition to that the Ugh-A-Wug number was placed in as the first song once Peter, Wendy, John & Michael get to Neverland and turned it into a stupid riverdance kind of thing with the Indians just repeating "Ugh-A-Wug, Ugh-A-Wug, Ugh-A-Wug Wah" over and over and OVER. "Wendy" was replaced by a very strange song that Peter sang called "A Little House for Wendy" which I assume was written by the director or someone, because I've never heard a song like this even cut from any of the various versions of the show. They rearranged scenes, had the whole pirate ship scene take place on the Neverland set and lifted material from the McCoy Rigby version as well - which is just blasphemy. On top of all of this the woman playing Peter was simply too... how shall I put it... she was too buxom to be playing Peter. It was just an awful evening. Thank God the tickets were free.

[shesings]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 12:36am

hahaha! i'm from st. louis .... come on just tell me what theatre it was! (i have an idea or two)

edit: never mind! i know where it was. yeah - that theatre takes "Artistic liberties" a lot. i used to have season tickets and it always amused me b/c they always cast the same 5 or 6 people whether or not they're appropriate for the show! also did you notice that 99% of the audience was elderly? Updated On: 7/14/04 at 12:36 AM

[Clarinetbiter135]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 12:39am

Our high school changed the ending of Oklahoma... yeah

[Musetta1957]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 12:42am

I saw a production of "Les Misérables: School Edition" that was so clearly in violation of their contract that I not only e-mailed MTI with all the relevant information, I ended up starting a flame war between me, some of the kids' parents, some disgruntled audience members, and the director of the show, on that theatre company's message board -- and the board was taken down and has not been put back up since.

This was all about two years ago.

I win.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 12:46am

lol. what did they do that was in violation???

[SuperSchubert]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 12:46am

Shesings,

Hehehe...so you DO know what I'm talking about.

Yes, the audience is pretty much the elderly, which is good becuase they're out there doing something fun, but bad because it is too telling of the younger audiences. where the hell are they?

You know, that other major, outdoor, Equity theatre in STL tends to cast the same actors all the time...lol

-SuperSchubert Updated On: 7/14/04 at 12:46 AM

[Musetta1957]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 12:52am

"lol. what did they do that was in violation???"

* One role was split into two and the lines were distributed among the two performers.
* A few lyrics were changed and not using any of the alternatives I'd heard other schools use.

Right now I can't remember much else off the top of my head, but I actually had a list when I e-mailed MTI. It was so bad, I've tried to block it out!

I saw another production more recently which I should've contacted MTI about as well, but got lazy. Oh well.

Now that I'm typing all this out, I also remember a very large church production of Joseph ATD which had about 30% different lyrics, because (I sort of knew someone in the cast, and she told me this), "The director didn't like Tim Rice." Uh.

The only lyric I remember offhand that was different was that Potiphar made Joseph "master of his website" instead of "leader of his household."

[shesings]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 12:57am

yeah ... good old st louis. I boycott the other, major, outdoor theatre b/c the director and i have problems ... but my dad saw cats there 2 nights ago and said it was the funniest thing ever!

Back at theatre #1 we used to wonder if we just had tickets for geriatric night, but I have some friends who've worked there and they confirmed that it is that way every night! Oh its funny.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 12:58am

I go to a private christian university (and yes, it sucks) and we did TAMING OF THE SHREW. We had to cut out SO many lines because it wasn't up to "the standard of christian values that the school represents." You DO NOT cut up Shakespeare. That should be a sin punishable only by death. There was one line my teacher kept in that I said (I was Gremio) and it went: "You many go the devils dam, your gifts are so good, here's none will hold you." I was talking to Kate. My teacher got into SO much trouble for keeping in that line. But, if they would have read up on their history a little bit, they would come to realize that saying "you may go to the devil's dam" means "go to your mother's house." I hate christians and I am one. So, what does that say?

[shesings]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 1:05am

why didn't they pick a show that was more christian friendly? I went to a catholic high school and we had to be VERY careful about what shows we did.The theatre that schubert was originally talking about got in trouble a few years back b/c they did damn yankees and most of the elderly patrons were mad that the lod's name was used in vain. I was pretty amused. At least at a christian University they have a reason to be offended!

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 1:10am

I honestly don't know why they didn't choose something else. But, I am big supporter of NO CENSORSHIP when it comes to literature and theatre, so it bugged the crap out of me.....still does. Also, we did OKLAHOMA last year and we had to change all of the swearing and other things so it will not be offensive, but after doing that show I have come to realize something. That whole show is nothing but sex. I can't believe we even got away with doing the show, but we did. I guess no one in the audience caught on to all of the MANY sexual innuendoes that were being performed on that stage.

[~FloweryFriend~]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 1:12am

I go to an all-girl Catholic school, but our theatre department is willing to say ANYTHING in a show.
I guess we're lucky.

[shesings]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 1:14am

you are lucky. my all girl catholic show wouldn't even do grease!

[~FloweryFriend~]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 1:19am

My high school music director refused to do Grease.

But at my college, it seems they'll do almost anything.
Except the Vagina Monologues.
Those were outlawed.

Next year, Notre Dame is doing "Angels in America" AND "The Laramie Project" in the same season!
Catholic school gone wild!
Woo-hoo!

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 1:24am

This is hypothetical, but if a theatre group were to put on a production of the ever changing "Jekyll & Hyde" and use changes that were made for the Broadway production or things used in previous productions... would that be a breach of contract for the licensed post-Broadway tour version, even though they are changes that were made by the authors of the show???

[J.]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 1:26am

I thought that production of GYPSY was terrible but I don't like the show anyway so . . .

[KJisgroovy]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 1:30am

"You DO NOT cut up Shakespeare"

Um really? You almost always cut up Shakespeare. The published historic texts of Shakespeare are cut up... Shakespeare is cut for length, content, and concept...in almost every production.

KC

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 1:31am

I know, my point was that you shouldn't cut up anything from any play or book. I hate censorship. If it is too long, DON'T DO IT. If it has questionable material, DON'T DO IT.

[Jon]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 1:50am

Spider, you must be really enraged that this years Tony for besty revival of a play went to a production which took Henry IV parts 1 and 2, cut the crap out of them and combined them into one 4 hour play.

Fact: the vast majority of productions of HAMLET completely cut out all the Fortinbreas scenes.

Fact: about half of all productions of Taming of the Shrew cut out the entire prologue.

Fact: many theatre companies and directors like doing Shakespeare because you don't have to pay royalties, and you can change it as much as you want without getting into trouble!

[DivaMommy]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 1:53am

Bwayboy -

The Rogers & Hammerstein library do offer "I Have Confidence" and "Something Good" to be inserted into the show legally, just so you know.

[BWayBoy88]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 1:59am

Oh ok. Those songs are much better than the songs that were written for the show.

[SuperSchubert]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 2:03am

Our high school changed the ending of Oklahoma... yeah

How?!? By having Jud kill off Laurey and Curly? If so, that would be awesome. I hate those characters, and think Jud is a misunderstood guy. But, I'm guessing the changed ending was something more akin to a Jud-isn't-daid-but-he-reconciles-with-Laurey-and-Curly sort of deal...

My high school music director refused to do Grease. But at my college, it seems they'll do almost anything.

I can't fault the music director for not wanting to do Grease. It's not the most moral show to be doing at a high school. In fact, I think it is a bad musical to begin with. And your college sounds like my alma mater, which also happens to be Catholic. We did Cabaret, Chicago, Pippin and The Laramie Project--and the best part is that we got away with each one!! Ironically, the only show we've gotten hate mail for was Godspell because, according to the letter-writer, Godspell was sacreligious for mixing Rock with the Gospel of Matthew... People are so empty-headed.


This is hypothetical, but if a theatre group were to put on a production of the ever changing "Jekyll & Hyde" and use changes that were made for the Broadway production or things used in previous productions... would that be a breach of contract for the licensed post-Broadway tour version, even though they are changes that were made by the authors of the show???

I've done that show before, too, and I think that it has the potential to be a big mess of cuts, additions and whatnot. I'm pretty sure anyone doing the show would be smart to just stick to the version they are handed. There would be too much confusion if you take into account the 1000 different changes made to the show in its years...

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 7/14/04 at 2:06am

Even so, the MTI script sucks since they cut "No One Knows Who I Am" and don't include "The Girls of the Night". They need to sit down and write the difinitve version of that show. Hopefully we'll get that with the London production. haha Updated On: 7/14/04 at 02:06 AM