Marc Shaiman responds to Michael John La Chiusa — Page 4

Sweeney is based very specifically on Christopher Bond's play of Sweeney Todd that Sondheim saw in London in the early 70s. There had been dozens of Sweeney Todd plays for more than a century in London and none of them interested him. The Bond play was different because it provided underlying motivations for why Sweeney did what he did, unlike the others the just made him a mindless crazed killer. He purchased the rights to Bond's play and Wheeler crafted the book closely based on Bond's original work.

A Little Night Music is based on Ingmar Berman's film "Smiles of a Summer Night." "Passion" is based on Ettore Scola's film "Passione d'Amore." Forum is based on the plays of Plautus. Company is based on a series of unproduced one acts by George Furth (so I guess it technically wasn't based previously existing work, but one could quibble). Merrily, as stated, was based on the Kaufman and Hart play of the same name. Into the Woods is inspired by fairy tales and Bruno Bettleheim's "The Uses of Enchantment." Assassins is based on actual historical figures (as was Bounce). The Frogs is based on Aristophanes' play of the same name.

And none of any of that diminishes the extraordinary achievements of Sondheim or any of his book writers.

---

Updated On: 8/8/05 at 02:06 PM

Much of Sondheim's imagery in 'Sweeney' does come directly from Bond's play and it's also pretty much a scene-for-scene adaptation.

OK, now I'm off-topic.
Robbie: you got it, but it'll only be the first verse/chorus because the 'group' chorus won't be as strong up a step...

LCZ: "And will Peter Mills' PURSUIT OF PERSEPHONE ever come back to life?"
Yes, it certainly will, but you gotta be patient! :) There are song snippets up now (piano/voice only) on Pete's site, http://pcmills.tripod.com ... and there will be a "concert reading" at a major venue in the fall/winter, date TBD.

ok, to lighten things up here...

https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.cfm?thread=862575&dt=080805021923

I usually just read the message boards to see what others have to say about random theatrical topics..but I was able to read MJL's essay and Marc Shaiman's response. I have to say that I am a huge fan of MJL's "The Wild Party" and "Hairspray" respectively but I really don't think that Mr. La Chiusa should be expressing his clearly passionate views on the topic of the American Musical if he wishes to continue getting his works produced luckily on the Great White Way. I know that in the stage artists' mind, the "green" is the farthest thing from his/her circle of thought but look at the success of Hairspray and the not-success of MJL's shows. That is just dollar wise. Has anyone ever heard the phrase "burning bridges"? How can Mr. LaChuisa accuse and bring down these extremely succefull artists such as Marc Shaiman, Jack O'Brien, Jerry Mitchell, Mel Brooks, ect...? They are all "working" in the theatre and paths are bound to cross at some point. I must have seen the same actor at the last 10 auditions I have went on and after the 3rd run-in, I said to myself , "I am going to work with him one day"! Although I do appreciate criticism and open discussion about the theatre world, I can honestly say that MJL's essay was a little much but I also do appreciate Mr. Shaiman's response. I think everyone should kiss and make up!!

I am so tired of this "original musical" argument.

I never saw the movie version of "Hairspray" and I never saw the movie version of "The Light In The Piazza" but I did see both musicals on Broadway and I enjoyed the hell out of each of them. As a matter of fact I've seen "Hairspray" three times because after seeing it first time I decided that friends of mind should see it as well so the next two times I went, I took people with me.

I go to the theatre to be entertained and that could mean to laugh or to cry or to be provoked. I don't care about the genesis of the piece as long as it's done well. It could have been created by Satan for all I care.

I recently saw "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels" and throughly enjoyed it. I own the DVD of this movie and I had seen that a few times but I was totally entertained the evening that I saw this show on Broadway and I'm sure that I will see it again.

I think that there is a bit of snobbery involve in this "original musical" argument. Somehow it's more "pure" if it's written from scratch? What kind of bullsh*t is that? Who is supposed to decide for me what I should go and see see? "Hairspray" works because it's a good and entertaining show and it's still doing good business because people want to see it.

I don't care if it originated as a play, movie, novel, short story or newspaper article. If it's enjoyable and entertaining people will go and see it and I don't need someone trying to tell me if I should be enjoying it.

Yes, there are musicals out there that I don't particularly enjoy but that's a matter of my personal taste and everyone's taste is going to be different when it comes to any kind of entertainment.

---

send over that guy in your icon, and I'll personally hand it to him!

(the article, the article!!)

http://www.metoperafamily.org/operanews/issue/article.aspx?id=1261&issueID=50

---

oh no!! does this mean your icon isn't coming over to get a hard copy??

(of the article, the article!!)

Too bad MJLC never criticized the work.

Would it mean more or less if he were an outsider?

He never said, "Hairsrpay sucks big time."

And Marc never criticized LaChiusa's shows in his comments.

I suggest you follow Marc's lead and (not) do the same!

---

Updated On: 8/8/05 at 04:10 PM