Munk's LESTAT review

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 3:05am

It's no secret that this production is plagued with...well, everything that could possibly plague a new Broadway musical. Nothing I write in this review will break any new ground with discussions of this show - and nothing will probably reveal anything new to you, but I thought I would atleast share my experience.

"The next CARRIE?" some have asked? Well, no - not even close. We all know that this show had a very harsh out-of-town run, but from what we've all heard, the LESTAT here in New York is drastically different. Well, if the LESTAT here is better than what West Coast audiences were exposed to, I can only imagine what that version must have been like.

I feel that this production started to go wrong as soon as the adaptation of Anne Rice's novels was underway. Plot points are missing - and that's a given. No one expected a carbon copy of the novels on stage, let alone three stories in a 2.5 hour period, what what we're presented with here doesn't make one bit of sense. Rice's style is lost here - this show bears literally no resemblance to what she created in her beautifullly stunning novels.

Of course, one's appreciation of the musical absolutely should not depend on prior knowledge of the pre-existing material. Anne Rice fans will undoubtedly be disappointed here, as will, atleast in my mind, the entire audience.

Plot points have been moved around, characters have been moved around, things have been omitted, and things have been added. That's all theoretically fine - after all, it's an adaptation. However, the resulting material must atleast make some sort of sense.

The only way that I could follow the plot (which I was barely able to do) was because I knew the books, and I knew the stories. Several friends that accompanied me had no prior knowlege of the story - they hadn't even seen the films - and they were confused, frustrated, and just pissed off that what they were watching was incomprehensible.

Elton John's score here is mind-numbing melodramatic ballad after mind-numbing melodramatic ballad. Probably one memorable tune - and although a memorable tune does not qualify a score as good, the rest of the music all sounds the same. It's dark - yes - but it's lame. It sounds literally like music that Frank Wildhorn wrote for both DRACULA and JEKYLL AND HYDE and decided to omit from the production. The lyrics are just awful. On the upside, Elton John and Bernie Taupin have managed to make even Frank Wildhorn and his lyricists look just brilliant - and THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is an feat of epic proportions. The score here is laughable, forgettable, and pitiful.

Linda Woolverton's book barely services the shoe-string plot, but I have a feeling she can't be held solely responsible for the lack of anything interesting in this disaster.

Robert Jess Roth's direction is below pedestrian. In fact, the show is just so pitiful to begin with that I'm not quite sure what more he could have done with it.

The cast is fine across the board, for the most part. Hugh Panaro lacks the charm and sheer sexuality that Lestat must have. What we're left with is a bland, miscalculated portrayal of a "man" that all of us should be fascinated with. His voice delivers - it always has - but his overall performance here is forgettable and extremely disappointing.

Carolee Carmello is one of the most talented musical theatre performers of our time - she's proven that to us time and time again. Here, she's in fine vocal form and has strong commanding stage presence, but her part is the most underwritten in the entire show. In the novels, she is killed. Here, we don't exactly know what happens to her. She's extremely miscast as well - she is supposed to be Lestat's mother, yet they look more like siblings, or just young lovers.

I don't have the attention span or the will to say any more about this show, other than that - while nice to look at at times (thanks to the Sets, Costumes, and lighting of Derek McLane, Susan Hilferty, and Kenneth Posner), the show completely misses the mark and is beyond repair. If will close on Broadway at both a financial and artistic loss, which is a shame.

Like all terrible shows of bizzare nature, it will undoubtedly develop some sort of small cult following - people that say, yes, the show might be no so great, but wow - vampires! Or, they may just be naive enough to think that the show really is pure brilliance and- if that's the case, then knock yourselves out, guys.

The final line in the play - as spoken by Carolee Carmello - is something along the lines of "Come, Lestat. Drink my blood." The delivery is so horrendous and so laughable that you'd swear you were back at SPAMALOT with Sara Ramirez mocking some other unfortunate theatre endeavour. I literally burst out laughing (well, several times in the show) - but most notably there.

It's strange. Joe Brook's best score Tony nomination is getting more and more likely by the second.

[DG]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 3:13am

If Ms. Carmello was given the last line of the presentation you saw, then it continues to get re-worked radically on a daily basis. That in no way coincides with what we saw last Monday.

Although, our reactions were the same - I fell over the empty seat next to me roaring with laughter at the final moments of our night.

Perhaps that's what their goal is - complete communal release through laughter. If that's the case, then they'll be a ringing success. Everyone around me was in tears from laughing at the musical we saw.

[EponineThenardier]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 3:30am

Uh oh. Is the dialogue getting worse from when I saw it? Oy!


"they may just be naive enough to think that the show really is pure brilliance"


Oh it's faaaaaaaarr from brilliant. But I thought it was good fun nontheless.

[dancinfan]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 5:28am

Although I can agree with a great deal of your review, I can't say that I had any trouble following the plot put forth by the play. In fact, in Act One, I felt that the author and lyricist were beating me to death with plot and relationship issues and kept thinking, "All right already, what do you think I am - stupid?" For the record, I have never read Rice's books.

I agree that most of the time it is pretty to watch design-wise, but the Wildhorn comparison is a good one - so many damn ballads. Kudos for the New Orleans bayou staging of Welcome to the New World; at least it had a different feel and look that totally changed the show's angle.

[exedore]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 7:26am

Another excellent review from Munk.

If I may ask, what did you think of Drew Sarich?

[ken8631]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 7:30am

I didn't think the plot was esay to follow either - I haven't read any of her books. It was just plain not good.

[batboy4692]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 1:08pm

I think it's so fascinating that there can be such drastically differing opinions of this show. I myself have seen it. Several of my friends have seen it. And I will refrain from voicing my own opinions just yet.

But how can the show be painfully easy to follow...and difficult at the same time? I've heard it's difficult to follow in the balcony though as in the Palace those seats seem miles away from the stage. I saw it from the orchestra, so I had no problem whatsoever.

Munk, you said you'd read the books - so how can you think Gabrielle was killed?! She was in Queen of the Damned, and referenced throughout the others. She is a free spirit and was NEVER killed. This alone makes me think you are less credible. Also, Carolee doesn't say the last words of the show - Hugh does and they are "I am the Vampire Lestat. And I will live forever." Not sure how you managed to forget/miss that.


Yes, the show has its problems. EVERYONE is aware of that and changes are going into the show DAILY. But honestly, it's MILES better than Dracula and (cough) Dance of the Vampires. The design is beautiful (lighting, sets, costumes), the actors are incredible with one of the best ensembles I've seen on Broadway in a LOOOOONG time. So many of the shows these days treat ensembles like set dressing. This ensemble is highly active and individual. Drew Sarich and Allison Fischer are incredible and the audiences go NUTS when they come out and bow (at least what I saw). Carolee and Jim Stanek are wonderful and Roderick Hill is an awesome actor.

This show will never be for everyone. What show about vampires CAN be?

[uncageg]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 1:18pm

batboy, it sounds as if the ending may have changed since you saw it. It is in previews so that is quite possible.

[Color and Light]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 1:20pm

"On the upside, Elton John and Bernie Taupin have managed to make even Frank Wildhorn and his lyricists look just brilliant - and THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is an feat of epic proportions. The score here is laughable, forgettable, and pitiful. "

Burn! That's what I was thinking throughout the whole show!

"The final line in the play - as spoken by Carolee Carmello - is something along the lines of 'Come, Lestat. Drink my blood.'"

Yikes. I don't know if that's better or worse than the ending I saw.

Updated On: 4/11/06 at 01:20 PM

[Ravenal]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 4:12pm

But yet once again; it has to be asked...if the show is as bad as is being reported...how does it get produced? Are people just so afraid of Sir Elton that they can't tell him no? With ticket prices and such, why does it seem that there is an acceptable level of mediocrity amongst patrons?

[EponineThenardier]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 5:22pm

For me Elton is not the problem, if anything his part of the show is what makes the show (for me) very enjoyable. So for those who don't like Elton's music or this score in particular, it makes it hard to sit through.

Basically there are three things that are keeping this show afloat. Elton's music, the cast and the creative DESIGN team (costumes, sets, lighting). The rest I'm sad to say, seem to be blind in obvious changes that need to be made.

I'm sorry, but it is pretty freakin obvious that there NEEDS to be music in the ends of act 1 and 2, and yet the people who are making those decison's seem to be ignoring that blantantly obvious fact. And some of the dialogue is atrocious, and yet it seems to go with the territory in vampire musicals.

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 5:32pm

I don't want to make excuses, but it seems that there is more going on with the changes than just the director.

It seems the production team is having a say on something.

Of course, the most important aspect of a musical is the music. And, well, the music is just sad. A sad excuse for a score.

[thespian geek]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 5:37pm

If I may ask, what did you think of Drew Sarich?

I know this wasn't directed at me, but when I saw the show, Drew was the highlight of the production for me (which is saying something because I really don't like Armand all that much in the books, but I LOVED Drew... I just thought he was phenomenal), with Jim Stanek and Allison Fisher being a very close second.

I wish Jim had another song or something, and not just a reprise of "Embrace It" - that man has such a beautiful voice, and it's just not being put to use very well in this show.

[EponineThenardier]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 5:40pm

"Drew was the highlight of the production for me"

I second that! But you all knew that already.


I too wish Jim had more of a song to sing. He was awesome when I saw him in Damn Yankees. Ironically enough his hair was scarier in that production that in this one. It's a big improvement.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 5:41pm

I'm not saying the plot is difficult to follow on a plot-point to plot-point basis - it's quite simple - but what is confusing (even to me, having read the books many years ago) is why they changed things, why they added things, and what strings these events together. The decisions make no sense, and the different plot points are strung together so haphazardly that nothing can be derived from this show.

If the show is truly this bad, how did it get produced?

Well, if that were a valid argument then we would be without terrible shows. Everything that opened would be fantastic, there would be no reason to review shows or even wonder about shows - it would just be understood that what we're seeing is fantastic. It just doesn't make any sense. LESTAT managed to get produced because, I'm sure Warner Bros. Theatricals (which is an entirely different topic), agreed to put money towards this show without ever seeing one iota of anything. They heard Anne Rice, Elton John, and Bernie Taupin - and I'm sure it sounded like a goldmine.

[thespian geek]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 6:41pm

"Drew was the highlight of the production for me"

I second that! But you all knew that already.

Hehe. Drew definitely got a new fan out of me after only being on that stage like, 5 minutes.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 6:44pm

Its all subjective. MUNK hated Wedding Singer, I loved it. And I'm sure MUNK loves shows that I hate. Its all subjective, that's why crappy shows are produced. The Producers may think that this show is amazing and love it. Look to Ring of Fire for an example. That show is still running at like 30% capacity, which is horrible for any show, esp. a musical. Yet, they still keep it going.

[EponineThenardier]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 6:48pm

"Drew definitely got a new fan out of me after only being on that stage like, 5 minutes."

Same thing here. He walked on stage pulled the hood down, and I was like "who is THAT?!" I feel so lucky that I got to see him in his first performance ever as Armand, it was pretty frickin cool.

[thespian geek]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 6:56pm

RentBoy, I loved The Wedding Singer, too. :)

Oooh.. back to Drew. I was sitting nosebleed balcony, so I couldn't see Drew's face. His talent is what got me. Though meeting him at the stagedoor? Oh yeah, he's a very good looking guy. Hee.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 7:52pm

Where did I ever say that I hated THE WEDDING SINGER?

[ckeaton]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 8:08pm

I'm interested in the new ending, can you elaborate...

The ending I saw:
Armand throws Lestat off the roof.
Lestat is crumpled on the ground (so ridiculous).
Marius shows up, apparently satisfied that Lestat has lived his "lifetime".
Marius lets Lestat drink of his blood, they rise into the air (Defying Gravity none the less).
Lestat shows up in jeans and a t-shirt... "I am Lestat. I will live forever."

What's new? Gabrielle comes back???

[craftymarley]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 8:28pm

Well for about a week the ending went like this:

Armand throws Lestat off the roof.
Lestat is crumpled on the ground.
Gabrielle shows up and says something like "You promised me you would never seek to end it without us coming together"
More Lestat/Gabrielle dialogue and then they do a duet reprise of "Crimson Kiss"
Gabrielle says "Drink son" and Lestat drinks her blood and they rise up into the air.
Lestat shows up in jeans and a t-shirt w/ Gabrielle sort of in the shadows also in modern dress... "I am Lestat. I will live forever."

I can't say it saved the show, but it was certainly better than the ending with Marius, who the audience doesn't even care about, as played by someone who can't even act. But from what I heard at the theater today they're evidently changing it again, so I'll let you know what it's like farther into the week...

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 8:29pm

Was he wearing LESTAT merchandise?

[ckeaton]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 8:30pm

We should start a thread and collect the various endings!
Please let us know...

(It seems to be a little late to be making such large changes, but at least they are still trying to fix it.)

[Theatreboy49]

Posted: 4/11/06 at 8:51pm

I love the show and pray it gets better because I don't want it to close epecaially not before that terrible ring of fire which will soon be giving its theatre to Doyle's Company. But I must say Lestat needs to cut the morality play I think will make a huge difference. And I don't see why audiences arent likeing it. When I saw it I as well as the whole theatre gave it a standing ovation.