Oklahoma! transferring to Circle in the Square... — Page 2

How odd that the last time Oklahoma! was revived, there were only two musical revivals that season as well.

Warbucks2 said: "Can someone describe further how this is not for traditional theatre goers, or why someone would say that? Another person said it was avant garde.

I’m genuinely curious how this is different from a traditional production of Oklahoma. Is it sexually explicit? How is it dark?"

I'd say that it takes a lot of the disturbing stuff that is sitting right there in the show as subtext and makes those things very, very explicit text. I found the production, more than anything, to be menacing. I felt like every muscle in my body was tensed up for almost the entire runtime.

Simply put, I loved this production, but I've always had problems with Oklahoma's book. I think Curly is best understood not as a hero, but as a malicious bully, and the trial at the end is one of the most profoundly messed up scenes in the classic American musical theater canon. This production reckons honestly with both of those issues, and for that, it won my heart.

Updated On: 12/11/18 at 05:26 PM

I really wonder how many people will book tickets just on it being Oklahoma! not having any clue about the production itself. Name recognition goes a heck of a long way nowadays.

Scarlet Leigh said: "So, legit curious about this one. To those that have already seen it, have they altered the script at all in regards to the status of Oklahoma as a state?

I mean there is a bunch of dialogue about Oklahoma being a territory and not yet a state. If they setting is changed to a modern one, where it's very much a state already, how is that dialogue handled? Not to mention pretty much the entirety of the song "Kansas City" being totally out dated but the change in setting. Does it read odd?

The costuming and props are not strictly "period" but the actual setting of the story is not changed.

JSquared2 said: "Not at all sexually explicit, and not the usual "happy ending" staging. "

Not the staging as in they have totally altered the end result or still the same but not played all happy ending but actually pays attention to the fact that some really SERIOUS and DEEPLY TROUBLING **** just went down? The rushed happy ending of Oklahoma is one of my most hated things in theatre so I would really like a more somber ending that reflects the gravity of what happens between Jude and Curly.

"

Without giving too much away, you're probably gonna like how this production handles it.

Scarlet Leigh said: "Grumble. Grumble. GRUMBLE. This bothers me. This really really bothers me. While a new staging of the ending makes me want to see it, this honestly might be a deal breaker for me. It seems like a small thing, I know but there is something that really bugs me about taking a piece of theatre set in a very specific time period with very specific references to that time, throwing modern clothing onto them, and calling it a day. That's not to say that you can't update a production into modern times, but some things can't work with just some costume changes."



Do you also hate it when it's done in Shakespeare? Genuinely asking, because you hardly ever see a production of a Shakespeare play these days that ISN'T modern dress, and it's becoming more and more common with other period playwrights. Personally, I don't mind it at all, but I do agree with you that putting a production in modern dress shouldn't be the only idea the director has.

For this show, I would say that the modern clothing is probably the LEAST of the radical things the director has done. There's a lot more to it than just modern dress.

JBroadway said: "Do you also hate it when it's done in Shakespeare? Genuinely asking, because you hardly ever see a production of a Shakespeare play these days that ISN'T modern dress, and it's becoming more and more common with other period playwrights. Personally, I don't mind it at all, but I do agree with you that putting a production in modern dress shouldn't be the only idea the director has.

For this show, I would say that the modern clothing is probably the LEAST of theradical things the director has done. There's a lot more to it than just modern dress."

I have not really sat down and watched many productions of Shakespere pieces that I could really answer how I would feel about it. I have READ a lot and study it but the only chance I have had to watch one was a college production of Mid Summer Night's Dream and they did some very odd things with their costuming that was not really modern yet also not true to period so I would not count it.

It never really bothered me until I saw a touring production of Aida that had the time jump but the people in the PAST were actually dressed more modern then the people we see in the "present" during the opening and the finale. Not to mention that they were running around with machine guns in Ancient Egypt. Oh, but ONLY the Egyptians. The Nubians were more accurate to an ancient time setting. The whole thing just looked an inconstant mess and felt it in the context of the show. I have never seen "modern clothing in a specifically timed piece" the same way since. Haha.

Fun!

schubox said: "Are there changes to the book or score? Or is it just setting/costumes, etc that are changed?"

I don’t know if any lines were cut, but there didn’t seem to be any new or rewritten dialogue. No cut songs like there were in Carousel.

Updated On: 12/12/18 at 09:47 PM

GeorgeandDot said: "Brecht's been doing that for a century now."



I don't feel like Brecht has been doing very much at all since his death in 1956