Lippa's Wild Party

Ick, Ick, Ick. Why would it transfer to Broadway while LaChiusa's was ON Broadway?

Anyway, I think it's just a mediocre pop score with lots of screaming and riffing. LaChiusa's score is artsy, Sondheim-esque, and PERIOD APPROPRIATE.

Updated On: 1/31/08 at 01:45 AM

I honestly just found out today that they were two different musicals. How is that for coincidence?

I only know Lippa's, but I love it. But with that powerhouse of a cast- how could you not?

From what I've heard Julia Murney gave one of the most impressive stage performances of the past decade in THE WILD PARTY. She (along with Sherie Rene Scott) is one of the few matinee female idols that I find pretty impressive and talented.
Toni Collette had better material to work with, IMO.
I enjoy some of Lippa's score. Ultimately, him and LaChiusa had very different views of the poem which I think is great because we got two very different musicals about the same poem (and I do really like the poem). I don't think either THE WILD PARTY was meant to make it on Broadway though. Neither had the commercial appeal, critical love, or celebrity casting that is needed to make it on Broadway today.

---

I think (but I might be wrong, because I can't remember where I read this) both Lippa and LaChiusa began writing their shows around the time when March's poem became public domain, which can account for at least some of the coincidence. Either way, it's just how the timing worked out.

Lippa's Wild Party off-Broadway ended a month after LaChiusa's began previews on Broadway -- it would have made absolutely no sense for two shows about the same thing to run at the same time on Broadway (the producers of Lippa's said in a statement that "it doesn't make sense to transfer to Broadway in the current environment"). Also, the reviews weren't fantastic (these are the only two I found with a quick Google search; there might be more, but I'm too tired to dig deeper):

Variety - http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117915264.html?categoryid=33&cs=1
New York Times - http://theater2.nytimes.com/mem/theater/treview.html?res=940CE7D81130F936A15751C0A9669C8B63

O no, why would you want to mix them? I think that would be terrible. They're very different shows. I say leave them be.

I'm sure Lippa's is performed more. The music is more accessible. That said, we did LaChiusa's at my school. I was the rehearsal pianist and played violin in the pit, and the whole show is underscored so I literally didn't get to see one bit of the show. That's some tough music and playing it straight through for 90 minutes is tough!

~Steven

See THAT's one of the reasons why LaChiusa's is done more often. The logistics are much harder to deal with. LaChiusa's is harder to cast, play and just do really. I say leave them be as well. They're very different takes both valid. I know there's no other real way to put it, but I really do hate when people say Lippa's is more accesible. It seems to imply that LaChiusa's isn't accessible, which is completely untrue.

The Lippa version starts previews Saturday at The Gallery Players in Park Slope.