PRINCE OF BROADWAY Previews — Page 8

I finally got to see this tonight, and well, as usual I have lots of thoughts, ha.

I believe a show titled Prince of Broadway (not Prince of Grand Street, as I've kept mistakenly referring to it for months!) should be first and foremost a tribute to Hal Prince. On that count, this revue is a complete failure. Prince is neither a composer nor a choreographer; he is a genius director and producer. Unfortunately, the best way to show that off is not have someone sit on a bench and sing "Will He Like Me?" This isn't a Bock & Harnick tribute. It's a Prince tribute. So after watching someone sing "Tonight At Eight" and "Will He Like Me?" what exactly did we learn about Prince's direction of She Loves Me? What about how he produced the show? (God forbid if you were unfamiliar with the show- then you really probably did tune out for that eight minutes of runtime.)

Now I'm not trying to compare Sam Gold to Hal Prince at all, but imagine if 40 years from now we have Sam Gold's Broadway. During the Fun Home section they wheel out a bed and some young woman sings "Changing My Major To Joan" and then a little girl comes out and sings "Ring of Keys." How is that a tribute to Gold? Tesori and Kron, sure- but not Gold. The brilliance of his Fun Home staging was how he kept everything moving so fluidly; the way memories appeared and disappeared again into the floorboards; Beth Malone's ever-present artist, drawing, remembering, mis-remembering. A revue format just wouldn't do it justice, at least one without a very large budget to recreate the effects.

In the Follies section they could have talked about how Prince changed the order of Broadway Baby and Ah, Paris or in Show Boat how he took Why Do I Love You? away from Magnolia and Gaylord and gave it to Parthy. I know they couldn't include material from every show he directed and/or produced, but to not talk about his 1974 revival of Candide is unforgivable. That production may have single-handedly saved Candide from flop obscurity, and Prince's environmental staging and commissioning of completely new book by Hugh Wheeler reinvented the show. You could write a whole damn play about his work on Candide and here it's not even mentioned. (Grind is also regrettably not brought up.)

Since we've all seen Phantom and heard those songs umpteen times, why not have a section talking about set design and how he conceived the chandelier falling? Why didn't they perform some book scenes and show how he influenced book changes? Or even how he collaborated with composers/lyricists? (I kept waiting for some anecdote where he said, "Out of town we just couldn't get the top of the show to work. We went through three opening numbers until we got it right, and this is it: ________________."

Why didn't they choose numbers that showed off his staging? Stuff like "She's a Nut" when 20th Century. Come on! That must be one of his tour de force comedy stagings. What doesn't work so well is seeing "Heart" or "A New Argentina" with four frickin' people.

I didn't learn a single thing about Prince I didn't already know. I didn't get an inside to look into how he works, creates, directs, picks properties, collaborates- nothing.

With all that said, it's not like there isn't talent on stage. Tony Yazbeck is a gem and deserves all the praise he's been getting; "The Right Girl" was the highlight of the show for me. I enjoyed the Show Boat section too, as well as West Side Story. Brandon Uranowitz made for a good Emcee after only seeing Alan Cumming play that part for the past few decades. I'd like to see what he could do with it in a full production. Emily Skinner looks like a million bucks and can still belt it out. The songs were mostly well-sung, even when the song choice was a bit baffling.

I wasn't in pain or anything, but I just didn't understand how this parade of songs did anything other than honor the composers/lyricists who wrote them.

Whizzer, were you able to make it to 54 Sings Sugar?

WhizzerMarvin said: "I finally got to see this tonight, and well, as usual I have lots of thoughts, ha.

I believe a show titled Prince of Broadway (not Prince of Grand Street, as I've kept mistakenly referring to it for months!) should be first and foremost a tribute to Hal Prince. On that count, this revue is a complete failure. Prince is neither a composer nor a choreographer; he is a genius directorand producer. Unfortunately, the best way to show that off is not have someone sit on a bench and sing "Will He Like Me?" This isn't a Bock & Harnick tribute. It's a Prince tribute. So after watching someone sing "Tonight At Eight" and "Will He Like Me?" what exactly did we learn about Prince's direction of She Loves Me? What about how he produced the show? (God forbid if you were unfamiliar with the show- then you really probably did tune out for that eight minutes of runtime.)

Now I'm not trying to compare Sam Gold to Hal Prince at all, but imagine if 40 years from now we have Sam Gold's Broadway. During the Fun Home section they wheel out a bed and some young woman sings "Changing My Major To Joan" and then a little girl comes out and sings "Ring of Keys." How is that a tribute to Gold? Tesori and Kron, sure- but not Gold. The brilliance of his Fun Home staging was how he kept everything moving so fluidly; the way memories appeared and disappeared again into the floorboards; Beth Malone's ever-present artist, drawing, remembering, mis-remembering. A revue format just wouldn't do it justice, at least one without a very large budget to recreate the effects.

In the Follies section they could have talked about how Prince changed the order of Broadway Baby and Ah, Paris or in Show Boat how he took Why Do I Love You? away from Magnolia and Gaylord and gave it to Parthy. I know they couldn't include material from every show he directed and/or produced, but to not talk about his 1974 revival of Candide is unforgivable. That production may have single-handedly saved Candide from flop obscurity, and Prince's environmental staging and commissioning of completely new book by Hugh Wheeler reinvented the show. You could write a whole damn play about his work on Candide and here it's not even mentioned. (Grind is also regrettablynot brought up.)

Since we've all seen Phantom and heard those songs umpteen times, why not have a section talking about set design and how he conceived the chandelier falling? Why didn't they perform some book scenes and show how he influenced book changes? Or even how he collaborated with composers/lyricists? (I kept waiting for some anecdote where he said, "Out of town we just couldn't get the top of the show to work. We went through three opening numbers until we got it right, and this is it: ________________."

Why didn't they choose numbers that showed off his staging? Stuff like "She's a Nut" when 20th Century. Come on! That must be one of his tour de force comedy stagings. What doesn't work so well is seeing "Heart" or "A New Argentina" with four frickin' people.

I didn't learn a single thing about Prince I didn't already know. I didn't get an inside to look into how he works, creates, directs, picks properties, collaborates- nothing.

With all that said, it's not like there isn't talent on stage. Tony Yazbeck is a gem and deserves all the praise he's been getting;"The Right Girl" was the highlight of the show for me. I enjoyed the Show Boat section too, as well as West Side Story. Brandon Uranowitz made for a good Emcee after only seeing Alan Cumming play that part for the past few decades. I'd like to see what he could do with it in a full production. Emily Skinner looks like a million bucks and can still belt it out. The songs were mostly well-sung, even when the song choice was a bit baffling.

I wasn't in pain or anything, but I just didn't understand how this parade of songs did anything other than honor the composers/lyricists who wrote them.
I have to respectfully disagree with your criteria for disliking the show. It seems as though you have some very specific expectations built in when you saw it-you want a deeper appreciation and understanding of how Prince Hal works, and only wanted inclusion of moments he created. This is my attitude-these were his shows; his name is on them. Any great number from any of these shows is appropriate. To pigeonhole one moment as strictly a Bock-Harnick moment is very nitpicky. I, for one, couldn't have enjoyed it more. Don't get me wrong- a more pedantic look at his directorial choices is interesting as a sidebar, but it doesn't enhance its theatricality.

Whizzer Marvin-First of all, thanks for listening to my comments and responding without getting hostile and defensive. Too much of that on these boards lately! My point is simply this- I can only respond to the show they chose to do, not the show they didn't do. Personally, I would've loved to see "A Little Priest", "A Weekend in the Country","Cool", "Our Time" and a dozen others, but that's just me. And yes, Stroman had a lot of straight ahead, minimally directed songs, from Ol Man River to The ladies Who Lunch. But who doesn't want to hear those expertly performed? For all we know, Prince himself may have vetoed a more behind the scenes,"making of __" approach out of modesty, or concern over losing a broader audience. Maybe someday we will find out.

I think another issue is that this kind of review just isn't going to get performers with the kind of talent that Mr. Prince required in all his productions. Tony Yazbeck is wonderful as was Brandon Uranowitz and a few others but when I heard Michael Xavier's slender voice in Sunset Blvd and saw how many things he was going to be singing in Prince of Broadway I knew there'd be a problem.

This might have worked better as a one-off concert which required less of a commitment and might have attracted bigger stars.

Whizzer, you really nailed it. Hal Prince loved group songs that weren't necessarily dances, and those are the kinds of things that would have showcased his work while also capturing the spirit of the show. With no ensemble, those songs were absent. Where were those kooky group numbers from She Loves Me? Rainbow High from Evita? Where was The Blob from Merrily? (Now You Know could have also worked to show this as well, but with no ensemble it fell flat.). They would have been much better with three/four "stars" and an ensemble, than ten "stars".

I think if you are going to make a Prince tribute work it needs to be big and definitely NOT cheap. The small cast size spelled doom from the start. Someone correct me, but I think Jerome Robbins' Broadway had 62 members in the cast? This at least needed 35-40. A number like "A New Argentina" is a perfect choice to honor Prince, but not with four people. I know his '74 Candide had platforms all over the theater so the actors could come out into the audience. How awesome would it have been to have a cast of 40 fill the theater and sing "Make Our Garden Grow?"

Maybe it's because of Chapin's book, but the phrase I most associate with Prince is "Everything Was Possible." The man's creativity knows no end and any revue/production/film that deals with his work should capture that spirit. If everything is possible, why was his revue presented in the most straightforward-high-school-production-on-a-cruise-ship way imaginable? Maybe you can do John Doyle's Broadway with 10 people and a piano player, but not Hal Prince.

raddersons, I completely agree with you about the group numbers that weren't choreography heavy. Given how much Prince loves Follies, with a big cast they could even have recreated "Uptown/Downtown" transitioning to "The Story of Lucy and Jessie." How freaking awesome would that have been to see an exact set/costume/dance recreation of both original Phyllis numbers? It could also show how Prince worked with both his composer/lyricist and choreographer to perfect Phyllis' Follies number.

A film would still probably be the best medium to showcase all this, but with some creativity I think they could have shown off a lot more of what Prince specifically did to make these shows special. Maybe this would make the show appeal to even more of a niche audience than it already does, but to quote the show, so what? It's running at a non-profit theater for a limited run, and you'd think anyone who buys a ticket to a revue honoring a director would be up for learning how he (or she) works.