NYTIMES Talks about Revivals

well, it can hardly be considered bad that there are so many new works on stage...

DRAT, and I was looking forward to Pajama Game!

---

And I'm very disappointed in Roundabout for doing it.

I did "The Pajama Game" in high school (I played Hines). I know it was a big hit in the 1950's, but times have changed. It's SO dated...I don't see this production being a commercial hit (which is why I guess it's being done at the non-profit Roundabout).

I dunno, as I read this article, I understand where people are coming from, but I'm grateful and wish more revivals owuld be done, personally. At 19, considering up until this past year or two I only saw a couple shows a year, there's so many classic shows I would love to see on the broadway stage. I'm soo hoping for WSS to go through with plans for '07 revival, there's no show I think I'd ever be so excited about...also quite excited for chorus line, esp. with the bad movie, still would love to see My Fair Lady, Brigadoon, Finian's Rainbow, South Pacific, Carousel(the latter two I wasn't fond as of movies but would like to see if I'd like the stage productions better), and the list goes on. However, I do understand revivals should not be done for me who didn't catch the last one a couple years ago, it still is something I enjoy and take advantage of.

---

Personally, I much prefer the idea of a new show to a revival. While revivals can be great, I think it's important to get new work out there. Not only does it make room for the talent of new composers, but it gives wonderful actors the chance to create roles. Revivals can often make very powerful statements if their subject matter remains relevant. If something that was powerful to audiences fifty years ago retains that same fervor, then it certainly deserves to be revived. Furthermore, I think it's very interesting to see some shows reworked (i.e. Cabaret, and the upcoming Sweeney Todd). I don't want to see a revival if it's only being revived for the sake of selling tickets to tourists, or just because it's familiar. I mean really, how many times is Guys and Dolls going to be revived before enough is enough? Familiarity is a pretty weak reason to put something on Broadway. I think my argument can best be summed up like this, "New and interesting is good. If there is going to be a revival, make sure it is reworked and still relevant."


If this seems redundant or ramble-y bear in mind I wrote this at 2 in the AM. Stupid O'Clock as I like to call it.

---

What was interesting about the article, though it wasn't mentioned, is that the revivals that aren't "tinkered" with, that are mostly left alone, do better than the ones where the creative teams feel the need to rewrite and restage everything.

---

Leefowler, isn't that kind of an overgeneralization? Chicago and Cabaret, the two mega-revivals of the 90s, were also big-time restagings. And plenty of conventional revivals have fallen flat on their faces. The issue isn't whether the staging is redone; it's whether the staging is any good.

Updated On: 8/22/05 at 03:21 PM