Merrily Staging Question

[Theatreboy33]

Posted: 3/28/07 at 1:18pm

I know this has always been a problematic show. Whether to choose young actors? Old Actors? So my question is, has there ever been a production that used 6 main actors? Old actors at the start, young actors at the end? What I love about Follies is the way the old and young versions of the characters constantly haunt each other. So has this staging ever been attempted with Merrily?

[Kringas]

Posted: 3/28/07 at 1:29pm

I've never heard of anyone attempting the show with doubling of the roles before (I've heard of productions that reverse the time scheme, but I sometimes wonder if that's apocryphal). I don't think that would solve any of the show's inherent problems. I actually think it would create more.

Also, characters like Gussie and Joe also appear as late/early (depending on how you look at it) as 1959, so if they didn't have alternate actors as well, I think that would throw the audience even more.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 3/28/07 at 2:27pm

The problem with the original production was simply that Hal Prince thought the performers should give raw and unpolished performances, as one might see in a school production. This garnered the unfair criticism that the performers were not talented.

Prince's concept that it was Franklin's life being acted out by the 1980 students was in fact a good one, but it wasn't followed through effectively.

The look of the show was terrible. The high school lockers (where the cast would sometimes go and change T-shirts while other scenes were playing) and the ugly multi-use jungle-gym unit were eyesores. The choreography was sloppy and uninspired.
The script was full of great lines but shallow in character development. (The revised version is much better but still has some lag here and there)

But ... many of the individual scenes played exceedingly well, and the three leads (Walton, Price and especially Morrison) were wonderful. And the score as documented on the OBCR is a source of endless enjoyment.

MERRILY is a tough show for first time audiences (meaning people who buy tickets and walk in cold not knowing that it is a story told backwards.) It is actually a show that plays better with subsequent viewings when you can see the back-shadowing.

The 2002 Shaw festival production cast performers who could comfortably play early 20s to late 40s, and I think that is the way to go with this show. Their staging was a bit awkward due to the small stage at the Royal George theatre. The Kennedy Center's production was better staged but not as well-performed, although Raul Esparza's Charley was amazing!

[Theatreboy33]

Posted: 3/28/07 at 11:39pm

has encores done this at all? i think itd be a good fit.

[sondheimboy2]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 2:03pm

I saw a pretty good amateur production that had a very clever staging idea. The used the game of "Life" as a theme. The back wall looked like the "Life" game board, with the path that you take and the spaces that your piece would land on.

But the spaces related to the show.
"Get humiliated on national television. Back two spaces."
"Get your first show produced. Move ahead five spaces."

[Kringas]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 2:10pm

That sounds like that might be confusing, though, since the show doesn't move ahread.

[sondheimboy2]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 2:18pm

What I failed to mention is that the "squares" lit up. So, when the show started "You produce your first movie" is lit up. Then, "You get humiliated on national television" and so on.

So, you could see that the story is going backward.

[Theatreboy33]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 4:25pm

That sounds very interesting. Do you have any pics of the set?

[Jon]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 7:25pm

It would be a violation of the licensing agreement to have different actors play the characters at different ages.