Michael John LaChiusa

I have a beef with Michael John LaChiusa. He slammed Hairspray one of my favorite shows. Did anyone see his show at the PUBLIC?
It is a snoozefest, even with the wonderful Testa and Kudisch.
SNOOZEFEST!
I love the Public theater but that man has a lot of nerve.

(I also hated "The Wild Party")
They should rename it Snore when I want to snore.
Note to Gerard: A Snore When I Want To Snore number would be very nice.

Spelling Bee: Mr. Barfee please spell BORING.
Barfee: Can you use it in a sentence please.
I went to "See What I Want To See and it was boring"

Updated On: 11/29/05 at 10:50 AM

You have a right to your opinion but when I saw it, half the audience slept. I loved Testa and Kudisch but even they could not save it for me.

By slamming his show like he did your beloved Hairspray, that makes you no better than you claim him to be.

---

Updated On: 11/29/05 at 11:03 AM

When I saw it, most of the audience was enthusiastic about it. During intermission I heard quite a few people say how surprised they were by it that it WAS entertaining.

By the end of Act 2 most of the audience was in tears from the emotional intensity.

Some audiences get it, some don't.

But I don't think he slammed Hairspray as much as what Hairspray stands for.

Fluff belongs on ice cream, not on Broadway.

(Though I will be seeing Hairspray soon for a third time - as mindless entertainment. (Hypocritical - not quite.) Sometimes I like to think, sometimes I like to play braindead.)

P.S. I agree - orange.

P.P.S. Maybe I have a problem with Marc calling Marie Christine boring...

Updated On: 11/29/05 at 11:06 AM

Right, SWIWS is boring and HAIRSPRAY is fluff.

It is great for those of us who are boring and fluffy.

Marc Shaiman and Michael John LaChiusa are both great for musical theatre.

---

Hairspray is not mindless. It has a great message.
It is also Campy, fun and a crowd pleaser.
Go see Hairspray!
PS: I loved Caroline or Change. Liked Piazza. Loved Violet.

Updated On: 11/29/05 at 11:10 AM

I personally like both Hairspray and LaChiusa's work, so they don't have to be mutually exclusive like you claim. I just happen to like them for different reasons.

---

Hairspray is cute enough, but the thing is, it's not really challenging to the majority of America. It's reinforcing positive messages, yes, but it doesn't really have any new ideas or new things to think about.

---

First of all, this story about LaChiusa's comment on Hairspray is really old news...the article was printed a very long time ago. Secondly, Shaiman defended himself by addressing the comment in the press, so I don't think you have to come to the defense of the show. Lastly, I believe that others who have posted on this thread are correct. The comment was a general remark about the fluffy trend on Broadway and as an artist and a composer, LaChiusa is entitled to his opinion whether you agree with it or not. Doesn't mean you have to hate him and his productions.

Lastly, I saw the Wild Party and thought it was a good production, though I knew that the dark subject matter and characters would not appeal to most tourist audiences looking for something light and fluffy like Hairspray. You can't compare the two genres, nor SHOULD you compare them. If you like Hairspray...that's wonderful...but don't put down other productions because they are deep and true to their source material. LaChiusa painted on a canvas that had been prepared by the author of the poem and he did it faithfully. There were some great performances in that show and some good music.

I think it is possible to like both productions, even if you will forever hate Michael John for dissing your beloved Hairspray :)

---

In 20-30 years, LaChiusa's work will be getting the praise that Sondheim is getting today. He is simply the best working composer around, and his work, due to the subjects he chooses, is going to be challenged. But in 20-30 years, I imagine all the tributes will be for his compositions. Just saying...

Updated On: 11/29/05 at 11:32 AM

Munk - it's called the "Rosie Generation"

What frightens me is that she is a "writer"

Corine2, I have a lot of respect for you but this is just a childish thread, even by my standards. What is this proving? I've corresponded with both Mr. Shaiman and Mr. LaChiusa and they have been nothing but complete gentlemen and I love both of their shows respectively. I've seen Hairspray twice and I had to buy another copy of The Wild Party because I wore out my first copy. I've even begun to grasp Marie Christine as what it truly is.

Hairspray is a show that has a message and whether it chooses to express that message with 60's pop music doesn't change the fact that the message still resonates with us. Similarly, The Wild Party has a message that resonates just as powerfully with darker tones and period jazz music

There is something to learn from both shows and because something is a smash hit with audiences like Hairspray is, doesn't mean it isn't offering anything artistically. Just because something is an artistic home run doesn't mean it isn't offering anything to its audience.

Maybe you need to learn how to hear the message in LaChiusas work. You say you liked Caroline or Change so I know you're capable of it. There is something to experience in every musical from Sondheim to Herman to Webber. Try See What I Wanna See again with a different mindset, maybe you'll feel differently. There's gotta be something there for you. There was something for me in Hairspray.

Yours Sincerely,

Charlie

---

I don't see why they're mutually exclusive. I loved both. Hairspray was a ton of fun. SWIWS was thought provoking and had gorgeous music. Why do you have to like one and not the other. Personally, I like to see more musicals like SWIWS because they are so complex, you can keep thinking about them after you leave the theatre. But I'm just echoing what everyone else was saying.

---