My Thoughts on YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN (Gene Wilder was there)

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 6:34pm

I adore Young Frankenstein. I've seen the film dozens upon dozens of times; it's one of the few movies I actually drop everything to watch whenever it's on. I can even quote it (and I do, quite often). I was actually talking to someone about it the other day and when I said "Frankenstein" the person replied "you mean, 'Fronkensteen.'" So, obviously, Mel Brooks' musical adaptation is one that I've been both eagerly anticipating and tremendously regretting. Was it a movie that cried out for a musical? No, but I couldn't see The Producers as a musical at first, either.

Invariably, Young Frankenstein: the Musical will always be compared to The Producers: the Musical. The only difference is that, well, The Producers, as a show, was memorable.

Cast-wise, Young Frankenstein is phenominal. This is truly what a Broadway musical is about: talented performers giving their A-game. They are all different (different-good) from their on screen predecessors. And, while none of them will ever top Marty Feldman, Madeline Khan, et al., they do a damn good job on their own.

Always dependable Roger Bart is an enormously charismatic Dr. Fronkensteen and has no problem carrying the show. Sutton Foster, decked out in a blonde wig, is a dynamic bombshell as Inga. She can now add champion yodeller to her already impressive "Special Talents" section of her resume (a list that already includes singing, dancing, acting, etc.). Fred Applegate is a great Hermit/Inspector Kemp (the soup scene, like in the film, is the stand-out). Megan Mullally, in her abbreviated time on stage, is a true Broadway diva. We've missed her behind the footlights. Shuler Hensley is hilarious as The Monster and makes that whole dance number called "Puttin' on the Ritz" as fresh as ever.

Yet the two standouts (and I'll call it now, Tony winners) are Andrea Martin and Christopher Fitzgerald. Both have expert comic timing and are simply perfection as Frau Blucher (neigh) and Igor.

The thing that both works and fails is the fact that it’s very similar (perhaps too similar) to the film. Whereas The Producers eliminated any reference to the 60s (LSD, his Campbell’s Soup can, and song “Love Power” were immediately cut), Young Frankenstein changes nothing, except the ending.

Brooks and co. seem to have taken a cue from Spamalot, keeping the bits they know the audience loves. But even Spamalot had bits added (Lady of the Lake) and subtracted (“Burn her!”). Somehow, they even managed to take the 90 minute film and only extend it by another half hour, music and intermission and all. At 2 hours and 40 minutes, Young Frankenstein is at least an hour longer than the film. I don't mind long shows (lord knows, I sat through 9 hours of Stoppard last year), but when it feels long, there's a problem.

Act I is long. Way too much exposition and too many character songs. Among the things that stop the show dead in it's tracks: "The Law," sung by Inspector Kemp; "Life, Life," which could easily suffice as dialogue; and "Welcome to Transylvania," sung by the Transylvania Quartet.

Act II fares much better. The only songs I'd eliminate are "Man About Town" and "Frederick's Soliloquy" (which is only 30 seconds, so it doesn't matter).

Robin Wagner's sets, William Ivey Long's costumes, and Peter Kaczorowski's lighting are exquisite, as expected. They just scream "WE HAVE MONEY!!!" The sets make great use of the enormous stage.

Susan Stroman's staging and choreography are exactly what you'd expect from dependable Stro: Broadway razz-ma-tazz. If you're expecting something revolutionary, you'll be disappointed. It's what you'd see in a nice, old fashioned Broadway musical. And any director should take notes from Stro on how to appropriately stage a crowd scene. Yet she borrows many things from The Producers (including a reappearing warewolf (there wolf!) a la the Little Old Lady in "That Face" and Elizabeth's entourage, which has it's own Shirley Markowitz).

Mel Brooks' score and his book with Tom Meehan are simply fine (fine as in "how 'ya doin? I'm fine.") They know what the audience wants to see: the film. All of our favorite lines from the film are there (my particular favorite, "taffeta, darling," is still there!) plus a few (not many) new ones. But the book meanders. It takes the show a good 15-30 minutes just to get the story going and carries on for a 15-30 minutes after it should have ended. Great belly laughs? Maybe a few. Lots of "bada boom" jokes, not "ha ha ha" jokes (example: "I went to...to have my arm and leg reattached. You know what it cost me? An arm and a leg!")

Mel's score is simply adequate, with standouts being "Please Don't Touch Me," "Roll in the Hay" and "Deep Love." Not many hummable melodies, though "Roll" is caught in my head.

But the whole thing just left me cold. Everyone around me laughed. I laughed. But there was just something missing. That spark of lightning, that The Producers had in spades.

What did thrill me? What really gave me chills? The hoots and hollers and standing ovation Gene Wilder got when he was escorted in and out during the intermission. At 70-something, the guy looks damn good. And he's very polite and friendly, too. Updated On: 10/13/07 at 06:34 PM

[heil myself!]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 6:43pm

GENE WILDER WAS THERE??!! Awesome! Any word on what he thought?

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 6:49pm

Couldn't tell ya.

I do know that his hair was having a good time, tough.

Oh, forgot to mention the wonderfully lush orchestra. Great to hear so many pieces and not a synthesized anything.
Updated On: 10/13/07 at 06:49 PM

[JKlock]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 7:06pm

Thanks for the review. As a huge fan of The Producers, I have extremely high hopes for YF

"But there was just something missing. That spark of lightning"

I hope that changes throughout the previews, I (as well as everyone else!) would hate to be dissapointed..especially those who loved The Producers

[Thesbijean]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 7:08pm

While I disagree with some of your points, I think we both were left with the same feeling. The show has no magic, it's missing that glow that the Producers had and kept even when Matthew and Nathan were not in it.

Hopefully they can harness it in the next month, though I doubt it...

[antz]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 7:24pm

I'm sorry to hear that the show hasn't changed that much from it's previews in Seattle. I know they cut a few things in Act 1, but it seems, by your review, it is still excruciatingly long. I'm glad to see a fan of YF agree that the cast is simply outstanding and really work their tails off. They really do! And yes, the sets adn costumes to scream $$$$, but when they're trying to seel tix for over $400, they should scream that! It'll be interesting to see "official" reviews when they come in. I too walked away having enjoyed it, yet I wasn't thrilled by it. I was hoping they'd find that magic in NYC, apparently they've still got a bit of work ahead of them. Thanks for the great review.

[mominator]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 7:27pm

Thanks YF007! I get to see it next Saturday. Really looking forward to Andrea and Christopher.

[Dirty_Rotten_Guy]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 7:39pm

Thanks,Yankeefan, very much for the review.

YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN is also kind of my guilty pleasure movie, it is so clever, and I really hope the musical doesn't disappoint.
From what it sounds, I won't be too disappointed at all. But like everyone else has said, I really hope the show is able to find that spark they don't have yet. I think that's probably the biggest issue right now, from what I understand.

But yeah, I was just wondering if you could elaborate about Sutton a bit. From many of the reviews I've read, people have said she's hard to believe as a sexy, blonde bombshell. Did you think she was ever a bit awkward in the role at points, or was she totally convincing? And how was her Swedish accent? From a small clip I saw of her singing "Roll in Ze Hay", it kind of sounded like her accent was there with some words, and gone with others. Just wondering, though- Inga is my favorite character in the movie, and I can't wait to see how Sutton portrays the role.
Yea, can't wait to see this in a few weeks! Again, thanks for the review.

[jaystarr]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 7:51pm

Thanks for a great review ! As I expected ...fun but not as good as The Producer ....


But the whole thing just left me cold. Everyone around me laughed. I laughed. But there was just something missing. That spark of lightning, that The Producers had in spades.


****

^^^ at least now- I know what to expect from a reliable source.
Though I still wanna hear from Margo & WBaf .....Can't wait !

BTW- mominator- I think were seeing it at the same time next weekend

J*


Updated On: 10/13/07 at 07:51 PM

[worrell4077]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 8:49pm

Great review Yankee.

I'm hoping to try for lotto soon, maybe in February.

[bythesword84]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 8:58pm

I saw YF on Friday night, and I have been watching this movie for years and years and love it to pieces, but I cannot understand how someone can say Roger Bart was good. I thought he was annoying, over playing it, and screamed every line he could- which not only ruined the impact of it, but gave me a headache. Bart aside, the rest of the cast was perfectly fine.

Musically, it was forgettable, though I was glad to see the way they handled Puttin' on the Ritz since thats the scene even those only moderately knowledgeable would know.

Now, I have always loved YF but it bothered me to see that it did get the Producers treatment. Yes, its going to be compared to it, but how could it not? The dancing style was similar, the general mood of the show was the same lightness, the female dancers made me feel like I was watching the same exact show from the Producers, the "fly to rio" line (which no one laughed at, and I doubt many even got what he meant) was a tribute to it, and the surprise song (with the "entourage") was a carbon copy of the assistants/creative team in Keep it Gay. Young Frankenstein is such a unique film that I was genuinely bothered by the way it seemed to be The Producers 2.0 in many areas. I understand if a formula isn't broke, don't fix it, but it also makes sense that they closed the Producers first, lest people think they're seeing the same show twice in so many respects.

I think part of the spark that was missing (aside from the lack of genuinely good music) comes from the tone being so light. YF, the film, with its black and white nature, automatically gives you a certain feeling. When you remove that aspect and put it in a bright and colorful world you have to establish that tone in a different way, and they simply don't do it.

I thought it was far from amazing, and that is a disappointment.

[Bwayfan4]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 9:14pm

Gene Wilder was there!?!? Although I have not seen the movie (with Gene), it would've taken everything out of me NOT to go up to him and start chanting some "oompah loompah" song to him...

[BrianIdol]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 10:23pm

ditto to dissapointed!

[Dollypop]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 10:34pm

I don't expect much from this show.

I didn't enjoy THE PRODUCERS as much as others did. I felt it had a mediocre score and the performacnes amounted to two hours of legalized screaming.

I'll see YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN when discounts are available.

[BrianIdol]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 10:39pm

yankee- i pretty much agree with everything you've said, except I think the sets are pretty standard and unimaginative - except the laboratory....and I thought the costumes did the job, but in most cases were bland as well.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 10:40pm

I enjoyed Roger Bart. Yes, he did scream, but it was character screaming, not "they can't hear me" screaming. Did it annoy me? Not really. It was a character choice that I felt was better than just being a carbon copy of the irreplacable Gene Wilder.

Dirty Rotten - I've never considered Sutton to be a sexy bombshell either. I distinctly remember walking out of the theater this afternoon and thinking "wow, she's hot as a blonde!" I didn't see awkwardness at all (Spoiler: even when Elizabeth squeezed Inga's tits.) Her accent is in and out, but I didn't really care. Her comic timing (along with everything else) is perfection. She's no Teri Garr, but that's a plus. It's her own character.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 10:51pm

Idol - Agree to disagree?

[jewishboy]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 10:57pm

I actually thought Sutton was better than Teri Garr and thought she gave a funny yet very honest performance. But, I disagree with you about Fitzgerald and thought that he just wasn't funny. It may be because he was given absolutely noting new to do, but I just thought he was boring.

[BrianIdol]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 10:59pm

lol, i absolutely agree to dissagree! I think the scenery certainly did it's job, but it just wasn't all that special...but I'm glad u liked it:)

[bythesword84]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 11:25pm

Yeah, see, I just felt like Bart was doing some weird channeling of either Nathan Lane (who I can NOT stand in anything) or Mario Cantone the entire time. It may be a character choice, but all I could think of was that it was annoying and made me not like him, which is bad when he's the main character.



Speaking of the sets...can anyone tell me what the point was of changing the leaving scene to a boat? I mean, it didn't bother me either way, I just spent that whole scene thinking "That is one big boat and it is only going to be in this scene."

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 10/13/07 at 11:29pm

Funny, I remember thinking the same thing, especially considering the scene culminated in a train station.

I also thought it interesting that Frederick was the virgin, not Elizabeth. "Ah, Sweet Mysteries of Life," was less funny (okay, it was still hilarious) knowing that it wasn't Elizabeth's first time and that "as every guy in New York knows, she comes first, too!"

PS: The best way I can describe the show is "a cold, mechanical money machine." And it should have ended after "Puttin' on the Ritz" brought the house down. Updated On: 10/13/07 at 11:29 PM

[miss pennywise]

Posted: 10/14/07 at 12:08am

I am fascinated by everything everyone is saying because I saw the show on Thursday night and I agree with EVERYONE...even when you have completely opposing viewpoints! I see all of the show's strengths and weaknesses. (Is it the Gemini in me? Who knows?)

In the end, it's going to come down to this: you're either going to like it or NOT like it. It's going to be "What overall feeling does this show leave me with?" I say this because, IMO, it is NOT an "original" production...it's the performances and the strength of the source material that make it work. (The sets and costumes are wonderful, too.)

For me, the perfect word to describe the show is "fun." I had a great time, and my "overall feeling" is positive. But it made me appreciate other, "smaller" shows a lot more.

Does any of this make sense?

[BrianIdol]

Posted: 10/14/07 at 12:17am

POSSIBLE SPOILER

yankeefan - ur right, after the "ritz" i was SOOO bored...I really didn't care whether or not the dr. lived or not...which is another part of my problem with the show, I had a lot of trouble feeling and caring for the characters...to the point where I didnt' even care if they died!!! To me, this makes for an unsuccessful story to say the least!

[bythesword84]

Posted: 10/14/07 at 12:19am

I'm glad I'm not the only person who was questioning the change to the boat scene.

I too was surprised that Elizabeth wasn't the virgin, it just seemed to make that dynamic weird. If she was the virgin her "coldness" was more understandable I guess, and his not being one made his touching tendency to be more understandable too...but I guess Deep Love wouldn't work well if she hadn't anything to compare it too.




...and Miss Pennywise, you do make sense, though I would have to say over all I would have to go with the not liking it side. It wasn't the worst thing I've seen (or even near it) but I certainly have no need to go back, which is something I always do if I like a show.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 10/14/07 at 8:19am

I'd go back...6 months from now...if I could get a free ticket.

Unlike The Producers, where I was willing to live in the St. James.

That says a lot.