Question about KISS OF THE SPIDER WOMAN Broadway production- Page 2

[Marlothom]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 7:17pm

I remember having a two page spread from People (?) on Ms. Williams in Spiderwoman which profiled some of her key costumes - I recall the "come" outfit was very expensive but was only on-stage for about 1 minute behind a screen.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 9:20pm

The musical KISS OF THE SPIDER WOMAN is a hateful piece of crap. How DARE a team of rich New Yorkers sneer at Latin American politics!

Read the novel (one of the great books of the 20th century) or even the play (not as good but still true to Puig's intention). KISS is about the coming together of an aesthete and a political radical, literally merging in an act of sodomy. It's about what each learns from the other.

In the musical, the sodomy becomes a highly sanitized kiss and the radical doesn't learn from the homo, he merely manipulates him to his death. In the original versions, Molina's death is heroic because, although he may be motivated in part by his love for Valentin, he has also come to realize there are things more important than mere escapism into Nazi propaganda films. Meanwhile, Valentin has learned a love of beauty and imagination from Molina that aids Valentin as he is tortured to death.

Even the film, despite the basic miscasting of William Hurt, remains true to the original intent.

In the musical, Valentin merely manipulates Molina and the latter becomes one more poor faggot who dies for loving an untrustworthy straight guy.

And the middle class audience gets to reassure themselves that they are "on the right side", not because they do anything, but because they feel sorry for gay guy.

Quite literally the most infuriating show I have ever seen.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 11/11/13 at 9:39pm

Gaveston, I love the book as well and enjoy listening to the show's score, but I have never actually seen it. I'm sorry to hear your assessment; if that's the case, I would almost certainly feel similarly. What a disappointing interpretation!

[Glitter]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 3:18am

Gaveston, I adore Puig's novel....and I adore the musical. They have some differences, but I honestly think you misunderstood a lot of what the musical says. Your worship of the novel seems to have blinded you to new interpretations.

I'm truly sorry you didn't like it. I'm equally sorry you didn't get it.

[Owen22]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 4:38am

The biggest difference is, in the book Valentine comes to genuinely love Molina. He isn't gay but starts a sexual relationship with him anyway. Not exactly a pity f**k, but he realizes Molina's love for him and his kindness and wants to repay and make this sad man happy. In the musical, its hinted at in "Anything For Him" Valentine knows if he succumbs to Molina's desire for him, he can manipulate him into delivering the [fatal] message when Molina is released.

[Brian07663NJ]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 9:20am

My brother-in-law worked the production with Chita. From what I have heard from his coworkers who were part of it, prior to the Broadway production, was that there were more graphic scenes that were removed in part due to the "shock of the blue hairs." Unfortunately, what works in a novel when produced for a wider audience has to be diluted.

I loved the show! Still love listening to the recording. I do remember Chita being in a safety harness as she climbed down the web to the stage. I do not remember if it was exactly during the title song. Probably not because she was in a killer dress to sing that song.

btw Eric...sorry you had a somewhat shocking experience with your grandma. I took mine to see Naked Boys Singing with a dozen of my friends. At intermission everyone turned around to see her reaction. During intermission she was surrounded by many people in the audience interested in her opinion. She LOVED IT and was eager to tell everyone.

[SidebySidebyLogan]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 1:42pm

Can we PLEASE revive this show!! Do we really need another remounting of the same production of Cabaret when Kander and Ebb have so many gems like this one? Sara Ramirez had been at the top of my list for years to headline a Spider Woman revival but then I saw Nicole Scherzinger sing Don't Cry for Me Argentina on YouTube and even though I kind of hate myself for saying this I think the next Aurora should be a former Pussycat Doll. She has so much more talent than she lets on. Get that girl on Broadway so she can actually show her chops.

[SidebySidebyLogan]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 1:42pm

Double post Updated On: 11/12/13 at 01:42 PM

[SidebySidebyLogan]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 1:42pm

Triple post Updated On: 11/12/13 at 01:42 PM

[SidebySidebyLogan]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 1:42pm

Quadruple post. Updated On: 11/12/13 at 01:42 PM

[SidebySidebyLogan]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 1:42pm

Quintuple post Updated On: 11/12/13 at 01:42 PM

[SidebySidebyLogan]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 1:42pm

Sextuple post Updated On: 11/12/13 at 01:42 PM

[SidebySidebyLogan]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 1:42pm

Septuple post Updated On: 11/12/13 at 01:42 PM

[SidebySidebyLogan]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 1:42pm

I have no idea what's happening.... Updated On: 11/12/13 at 01:42 PM

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 2:12pm

The biggest difference is, in the book Valentine comes to genuinely love Molina. He isn't gay but starts a sexual relationship with him anyway. Not exactly a pity f**k, but he realizes Molina's love for him and his kindness and wants to repay and make this sad man happy. In the musical, its hinted at in "Anything For Him" Valentine knows if he succumbs to Molina's desire for him, he can manipulate him into delivering the [fatal] message when Molina is released.

Exactly. And in the other versions, Valentin learns something about the value of kindness and pleasure (formerly unnecessary indulgences per Marxist ideology). Molina learns that one must act, not merely "decorate" (again in Marxist terms).

Glitter, what exactly did I miss? You are certainly right that had I been less passionate about the book/play/even film, I would have been less bothered by the musical. I also would have been less bothered if it had been an original musical or one based on a book by a North American; there is an issue of cultural appropriation of one of the great classics of Latin American literature. THAT offended me.

FWIW, when the project was first announced, I thought Kander and Ebb were the perfect team for it. I was wrong.



Updated On: 11/12/13 at 02:12 PM

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 2:20pm

My brother-in-law worked the production with Chita. From what I have heard from his coworkers who were part of it, prior to the Broadway production, was that there were more graphic scenes that were removed in part due to the "shock of the blue hairs." Unfortunately, what works in a novel when produced for a wider audience has to be diluted.

That is what I assumed. Thanks for the confirmation.

But I question whether the audience that watched people cooked into meat pies couldn't stand a little consensual sodomy. How did the film manage to be a hit with sodomy in close up? (Close up of their faces, not their genitalia.)

To me, worse than substituting a kiss for sex was the condescending treatment of Argentine communism. If your audience can't stand that, do a different story. Otherwise, you're just guilty of a lack of integrity.

Updated On: 11/12/13 at 02:20 PM

[Glitter]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 9:44pm

I don't buy into the idea of cultural appropriation here (and yes, I am sensitive to those issues). By that measure, Kander and Ebb shouldn't have written Cabaret or The Rink and Ahrens & Flaherty shouldn't have written Once On This Island or Elton John written Aida (....that last one is debatable :P). Their intention was to write with Puig, but as we all know he died in that awful circumstance. He approved of the direction they were going in.

Musical theatre is both limitless and limited. I followed the development of the show very carefully in Toronto and forward, and when the lights went down on Valentin saying "this time, maybe you won't be", there was no doubt in my mind they having sex. They didn't kiss and then blackout, Valentin pulled him to the bed, shirtless, and then blackout. It was painfully clear that was what was happening. Theatre can't do closeups and has to factor in the mood in the room. We all know how squeamish americans are about sex.....at that point in the show, the audience has watched torture, heard gunshots, and watched an onstage defecation. Is turning them off permanently worth it just so we can watch Molina and Valentin **** when we already know what they're doing? Every musical ever until 1993 (and even beyond) does this. Broadway is not about a radical aesthetic when it comes to sex and nudity. If that disappoints you, it's not Spider Woman's fault.

The Sweeney Todd anaology doesn't fly. The audience didn't watch people get cooked into meat pies, they watched them slide down a chute.

Valentin saying "he'd do anything for me, anything at all" is a realization of Molina's selfless love. It's in that moment that he realizes the value of kindness. He knows by "making that call" exactly how much Molina is willing to risk in the name of that love. It's not him plotting deceit. In the following scenes, he allows others to see intimate physical contact between himself and Molina. When Molina is shot, Valentin's reaction was staged to indicate love and emotion. After the final tango, Valentin is the first to tell us who this man was. He's not gay, but he loves Molina, and to me, that was clear from the staging, the lyrics, AND the music. He does learn kindness and pleasure, and Molina does learn that one must act.

Again, I think you must always remember how much room there is for story telling in musical theatre. It has to be econonical, and Spider Woman is about relationships. It's not about Argentine communism anymore than Les Miserables is about French politics, Evita about Peronism, or 1776 about American politics. The musical is a different take on the same story, and they HAVE to be different.....as much as I adore the novel (and I really do read it slowly once a year), I'm glad they streamlined it. As much as you think it trivializes or mocks marxism/communism/argentina/south america, for others it's an entry point. As a result of the musical, some people picked up the novel and learned something.

I am really really genuinely sorry you dislike the show so much. Audiences, award shows, and performers in many countries (including Argentina) have responded with passionate enjoyment of the show, and I'm among them. Anyway, if you didn't like it, you didn't like it....and that's what makes horse races! Maybe we'll agree on another show.

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 10:04pm

Somehow I ended up watching a good portion of this Brown University production of Kiss of the Spider Woman, and actually enjoying it!

That is, until the final moment of the show, which we know so well, had the bottom fall out from under it and into something strangely out of "Seasons of Love." Is this even allowed?


Kiss of the Spider Woman (part 2)

Updated On: 11/12/13 at 10:04 PM

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 11:11pm

Glitter, the show you describe is NOT the show that reached Los Angeles. My complaint isn't that the sex was insufficiently graphic, but that it was eliminated entirely. By the time I saw it, Valentin was played as a craven opportunist and Molina was just another, hapless gay victim, dying for unrequited love.

And of course it's "cultural appropriation" (which I wouldn't mind, but I think it carries a special responsibility to the original). CABARET was always a Westerner's view of Weimar Germany. AIDA began as exoticism, so there isn't much to appropriate there.

But it is you who misses the point if you think KISS OF THE SPIDER WOMAN isn't "about" Argentine communism. It is precisely about the personification of Marxism in Valentin and aestheticism in Molina--and the meeting of the two.

Maybe it looks good on you, but as a rule, blue hair is a poor fashion choice.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/12/13 at 11:25pm

Well, as I said years back apparently on the beginning of this thread, I loved the play on tour (probably not long after it ran in LA) and still love the cast album. But I find this thread fascinating and I do understand at least some of Gaveston's complaints. I was 12 or so back then, and didn't know the movie or novel, both of which I do know now so that couldvastly change my view (for the record I think the movie suffers from many of the problems mentioned about the play -- or did when I watched it immediately after reading the novel, specifically how ti shows the sexual relationship (I agree with Pauline Kael's complaints there...)

[eperkins]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 4:33pm

Perhaps the play Kiss of the Spider Woman is more true to the original book because Manuel Puig actually wrote the play himself. I saw it in London at the Donmar and it was quite wonderful. Just two actors.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 5:59pm

I agree with Gaveston about how the relationship was portrayed, especially when so much time was spent augmenting the script for the Aurora sequences, but my biggest complaint when I saw the show was the messy staging and design. I love the score on CD, but I often struggled to make out the actors against all the bars, projections, lasers and lighting. And the final tango just seemed so trite to me. After seeing the show, I truly felt Tommy deserved Best Musical that season.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 10:42pm

Glitter, my complaint wasn't that the sodomy was insufficiently graphic. I believe in the play they simply make it clear what they are about to do and then black out.

I don't expect to see anal penetration in a commercial musical. But the version I saw eliminated the sex altogether and left us with a cynical radical who uses a mere kiss to manipulate the hapless hairdresser. Both stereotypes are offensive to me.