#1
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.
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
