Reports/Speculation on A CHORUS LINE from SF- Page 5

[Kent]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 3:38pm

Nobody wants this revival to be successful more than myself. ACL is a deeply personal show for me and in my opinion one of the finest pieces of theatre to emerge on the American musical stage. I also have more invested in this revival than your average person as I've spent a great deal of time over the past year organizing a group of over 30 people; family and friends from all over the country who will gather in NY and attend a performance right after the show opens.

That being said, I have to agree with poster Michael Bennett:

"If the production ends up being an artistic disappointment, it will be because Lee and Avain couldn't let go of what made the show magical 30 years ago and focus instead on what could make the show magical to new audiences today."

The magic of theatre, musical or otherwise, is always about the "living moment" unfolding onstage. While there is no reason to change the book, music or time period of A Chorus Line, the show MUST ALSO have an inner vitality and freshness that lives independently of the original production. We've all seen what can happen when actors try to simply mirror and imitate the OBC - the life gets sucked right out of the piece. This is the downfall of many replacement casts on Broadway and most touring productions that I've seen. It took me awhile to realize that it was really worth whatever effort necessary to see the original cast of a Broadway show.

I think it's EXTREMELY tough to recreate the magic of an original production. Not because the original cast members are so much more talented than those that follow, but because the OBC holds part of the spark of the original creative process. Still, I absolutlely believe it's possible for this revival to shine if Lee and Avian give the actors room to breath and make the roles their own - plus keep their own minds open enough to allow room for variation from the original production when something new and fresh appears on stage, as they seem to have ALREADY done with the casting of Shelia. I also think the two directors would benefit greatly from bringing in a few outside people whose instincts they trust for a fresh pair of eyes and ears several times during the preview process.

I posted a thread on Baayork Lee's site awhile back where I said: "I don't think A Chorus Line should be created exactly as it was, but more as we REMEMBER it." Meaning...the show wasn't perfect when it was created. I finally got a chance to see the OBC of A Chorus Line on tape at the Library of Performing Arts in NYC, and was surprised to find that the acting really wasn't as wonderful as I was expecting (dancing and singing were stellar). In fact, it was downright weak in places. I think it's fair to say that the Triple Threat bar has been raised quite a bit since ACL first opened. Still, the OBC had an honesty about them that resonated with audiences. I think now the goal should be to HEIGHTEN and INTENSIFY the performances/staging/lighting etc., so that the show hits today's audiences with the same honesty and even MORE intensity than when it first opened.

My two cents.







Updated On: 7/27/06 at 03:38 PM

[morosco]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 3:42pm

(on soapbox)
Anyone who is passionate about the theatre must make it a priority to see this production. Especially those who are young enough to have never witnessed an official Michael Bennett production (this is as close as you can get now). Even if it should turn out to have flaws (I'm optimistic that any flaws will be few and far between) it is still a rare opportunity to see a very important musical that remains a milestone in the history of musical theatre. To me, Michael Bennett's revolutionary staging is the true star of the show.
(off soapbox)
Updated On: 7/27/06 at 03:42 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 4:17pm

b12b, one of the ways in which your point is perfectly illustrated is in looking at the original A Chorus Line TV commercial, or if you're lucky to have access to any, TV appearances or other video records of the original cast.

It's almost shocking if you haven't seen what the original cast really looked like in action (as opposed to in still photos) in over 20 years. Crooked teeth, pockmarks, yellow teeth, and lithe dancers bodies. It's really startling when we see how the ideals of beauty have shifted so quickly to braces on most every kid (something that came after the generation of the original cast was well in their teens, for the most part) and adults with ultra-white teeth bleaching and dermabrasion and botox.

When ACL opened, it was rare for anybody but rich people to enage in cosmetic enhancements, that was one of the delights of Dance: 10, Looks: 3. Val was unusual.

Besides being animimatronic performers, they also have to be (for the most part) cosmetically corrected to the point of having no physical flaws. Again, just another retreat from basic human status.

Updated On: 7/27/06 at 04:17 PM

[EponineAmneris]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 4:38pm

I take it personally because I love ACL and I love Cassie and I love Charlotte. I want her and the show to succeed.

[daydawns]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 8:30pm

I agree. I was at the preview on Sunday and thought Charlotte was amazing. She looked beautiful and her dancing was passionate and reached well across the footlights. Is the production still in its early stages? Yes. Will Everyone get better? Yes but to send out this kind of negative speculation about Charlotte and the production is beyond counterproductive. It is this kind of mean spirited attitude that has crept into so much of the entertainment industry. You all profess to be lovers of the Broadway stage and yet you will spend your time spreading speculation based on nothing. Shame on you! How can you expect producers and performers to put their hearts and souls into things if there are people out there who stand by, ready to cut those hearts out based on NOTHING BUT RUMOR? I think this link should be over and redone as comments from people who have really seen a performance of this production of ACL, If you like it, great. If you don't, that's fine, too but don't comment on things about which you have no personal knowledge. That's just spreading nasty rumors for the sake of hearing yourself talk. One could just as easily start a negative rumor about anyone of you that would be as pointless as what has been going on here.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 8:47pm

Shame on us???

Good god. Does this mean if we don't "think happy thoughts" then Charlotte will die??? You've seen Peter Pan one too many times.

What kind of grade school philosophy is THAT?

We are speculating based on the general consensus of reviews that have come in so far. They aren't RUMORS, they are valid opinions. And I've seen the scale tip towards disappointment more times than praise so far. And no one yet is "elated" with an unqualified rave. For a show like A Chorus Line, I was expecting RAVES. If this revival can’t get them from virtually everyone, then YES, I will continue to be disappointed. This show should be generating unqualified raves from the masses. The material is THAT good.

And for the record, I will continue to post my opinions, and hope you will do the same. But leave the "baby fairytale chastising" at the door, please, and grow up.

[PersonofInterest]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 9:52pm

I'm jumping in late in the game here, but have some things to say. I am seeing the show at the very end of the SF run (Sept. 1) so I am excited to monitor the progress here and see it for myself later.

I think "Michael Bennett" (the poster not the director) mentioned something a few pages back about the dancers being babied a little. I think thats probably true. Baayork is notoriously kind, I do know that.

I think a really great thing would be for the SF production to get fairly panned and then the cast will have a reason to REALLY deliver. Especially Charlotte. Although, as mentioned before, her career has had quite a few parallels with Cassie, THIS role was basically handed to her on a silver platter. So, she might be, unintentionally, a little complascent. OR she could just be settling into the role and trying not to force anything or burn herself out.

Interesting point about the minorites and Deidre being an African American Sheila. I hadn't thought of that. I LOVE Deidre and am REALLY excited to see her in the show because I think she is an incredible talent, but you really might be on to something about her ethnicity lessening the circumstances and impact of Connie and Richie. VERY astute observation "irememberitwell."


Updated On: 7/28/06 at 09:52 PM

[elphaba.scares.me]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 2:04am

My only question, which I don't think has been discussed here, is: WHY a Chorus Line revival? Why now? What is there in the cultural moment that should make people want to see it again?

Is it the corporate-ization of Broadway? The dying art of Broadway dance? Or is it just that it's been a while and someone thought people would buy tickets?

Not every show needs to connect to the big picture the way ACL does...I worry that if it's not the right time, the show will just seem hopelessly dated.

But I hope I'm wrong!

[jewishboy]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 2:59am

1st of all, I think this thread has gotten to be all speculation, so I will add my two cents

Christoph- Have you ever seen the movie Roxie with Ginger Rogers? That is what Chicago is based on and I find her characterization very interesting and excellent, but different then Gwen Verdon, Ann Reinking (sp?), and Ruthie Henshall. But, I think that Renée Zellweger really showed the role can be played vulnerably.

elphaba.scares.me- For me, who has never seen ACL live before, I think that the point of reviving this sow is exactly what Donna McKechnie said in her interview on Broadwayworld, to introduce a new generation to Michael Bennett's show.

And regarding the character of Cassie, I have always thought that she has to be the star of the show. From the moment she steps on you have to notice that she stands out, there is a reason Zach thinks she is a star. Donna McKechnie had a reputation for stopping shows (Company and Promises Promises). And while I'm not saying that Charlotte d'Amboise has not shown that show stopping quality, yet. And that is a big yet because I do think her dancing is great, but I don't know about her singing. I am very excited.

And I do have faith in this production and the performers.

Updated On: 7/28/06 at 02:59 AM

[PersonofInterest]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 5:38am

elphaba.scares.me - I wondered the same thing when I first heard about the revival. Why now? Of course, being only 25 I am really excited to see a full, Broadway calibur production since I missed the original, but I was concerned when I first heard about it.
I think Michael Berresse put it really well in the teaser/press tour they did that, if nothing else, a successful Broadway production that can run for a few years, plus launch tours and a resurgance (sp?) of regional productions, can create more work for dancers in an era in musical theater where dancers are becoming more and more under used and underapreciated.
ALSO, they have cast an incredible onslaught of talent for this production that just isn't working in NY in any other capacity right now. It's been HOW many years since Ken Alan was in Fosse and he was INCREDIBLE and hasn't been able to get a job on Broadway since because jobs for really strong, featured male dancers just don't exist the way they did 5 years ago and esecially the way they did 20 years ago!
Bennet and Fosse just aren't around any more and the choreographers now, talented as they are at what they do, are more focused on the new wave of "musical staging" than actual dancing to the extent it used to exist.

[sciguy]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 8:48am

When I was a sophmore in high school, I saw my first Broadway show. It was a Chorus Line. It is a show that is still in my top ten after 25 years of attending the theater.
Thank you best12bars for your post. As I read it I realized why A Chorus line is such a great show. The people on stage are "real people". A "perfect production of ACL" would absolutely be depressing. I can still remember connecting with every character as they took center stage. I hope that genuineness still remains in the new production.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 9:38am

"I think Michael Berresse put it really well in the teaser/press tour they did that, if nothing else, a successful Broadway production that can run for a few years, plus launch tours and a resurgance (sp?) of regional productions, can create more work for dancers in an era in musical theater where dancers are becoming more and more under used and underapreciated."

A CHORUS LINE really hasn't disappeared from the regional circuit, though. It has had mini-tours and continues to be a major staple with summer music theatres.

Most of these professional productions have been almost exact recreations of the original staging, which has always made the topic of the revival more cause for debate. What will be different for Broadway? Why should people pay 110 dollars to see this in New York when they could probably see pretty much the same thing at Casa Manana or The Muny for half the price?

The original creative team, I think, hold ACL very close to their hearts and largely feel that is just should never have closed the first time, and that it is enough to simply bring it back to Broadway as it was. Hopefully with a stellar cast.

That may or may not be enough to make the show feel exciting on Broadway now. We'll see.

I'm thrilled ACL employs so many dancers, but I would hardly say there are "less" dance musicals on Broadway today than there were in 1975. If anything its the reverse.

Broadway was moving towards a dark place in 1975 - the whole city was; and I think the comments in the show about how "Broadway is dying" felt very real and imminent for the original ACL cast.

People still say that now, of course, but it's pretty hard to believe with so many theatres full and so many new shows waiting in the wings to come in.

We actually have had more total dance shows like THE TIMES THEY ARE A CHANGING, MOVIN OUT, and HOT FEET and an equal number of dance focused musicals like CHICAGO, LION KING, and HAIRSPRAY in New York than we've had in a long time.

Its a pretty decent time to be a dancer on Broadway.




Updated On: 7/28/06 at 09:38 AM

[craftymarley]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 10:32am

"With all due respect to your comments...this revival is missing a KEY component...the people who did the musical direction and conducting...there are people in the community who would have added the needed layers of nuance and understanding...there are musical personnel out there...hand picked by Michael Bennett to open his companies all over the world, who are not a part of this endeavor. "

My impression was that Michael Bennett was unhappy with the original orchestrations and musical direction and that it was a specific choice to bring new people and orchestrations to the revival. Can anyone offer specific insight to the contrary?

[JarNerdAV]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 10:38am

"Why should people pay 110 dollars to see this in New York when they could probably see pretty much the same thing at Casa Manana or The Muny for half the price?"

Because every touring production and local community production of ACL I have ever seen has SUCKED (bad performances, bad casting, music that sounded as if it were canned, weak dancers)! This is a VERY hard show to pull off, and if it isn't done right, it can be painful. If it's done right, I'd much rather pay $110 to see it on Broadway then pay 10 cents to see another bad production. I just keep hoping and praying that the revival will get it right. I guess I'll know in November.

[morosco]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 10:45am

"My impression was that Michael Bennett was unhappy with the original orchestrations and musical direction and that it was a specific choice to bring new people and orchestrations to the revival. Can anyone offer specific insight to the contrary?"

New orchestrations? This is the first time I've heard that rumor.

[metropolis10111]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 10:55am

Ok I’ve been reading for quite some time here but now need to throw in my two cense. I LOVE theatre more then I can say, and find this show an endless fascination and part of that is being played out here.
You have the camp that says that this show was a huge moment in their lives and they felt it move them deeply so this show should be a time capsule to that time. As a 30 y/o gay male who has actually been in the show several times I have still never “got” that out of this piece. Please help me understand. I love the idea of it and still hope to get is some day. I just finished up a production where, yes everyone loved doing the show but we were given out sheets telling us what the characters were talking about in both the slang and pop culture. This is where the disconnect happened with a lot of us. I can’t relate to being “Locked in the bathroom with Payton Place” hell I never even heard of it till I did this show. Could I think of something similar in my life….kind of, but the 17 y/o sitting in the theatre is not going to want to ask someone “What is that….” Or “Who was that…” when a character is talking about an old movie star flame, or such and then think of something that goes long those same lines in their world. They aren’t going to get that unexpected twang of reflection of their lives. “Nothing” is so much a song that could never take place in the realm of teaching today that it almost come across as a desperate exaggeration. As was pointed out before “Dance 10, Looks 3” is so commonplace now that the shock of it is gone. I would love to hear from someone that is in their 20s that has been moved to tears and really connected with the piece, because I’m convinced that you had to come from that era when the show was still talking about relevant references to connect with it. I would love to see them retool the piece to fit a modern audience. A few things bigger then mommy and daddy walking in on you in drag have happened like AIDS, the internet, and 911 that have had a profound impact on the world that this piece does come off as whiny people with a chip on their shoulders about their childhoods. Make me want to like these people, and not just feel sorry for them. Make me see myself in them, but I can’t because they are now coming from a time that is almost naive to today. Hell have a cell phone go off or some one IM someone during the audition, just so that I could see something from my world in theirs.

Is it great to see ACL done as it originally was? Yes, I do feel that it was an important production, but don’t expect me to relate to it. Not the best example, but if you take Romeo and Juliet and look at how popular the modern movie version was it’s because kids could relate to it. In my personal world I would love to see ACL, Follies and HAIR reworked as they all could still have a relevancy to today but are hindered by the people clinging to what they remember as great about it as opposed to trying to get a new generation to connect with it.

Please be kind.........

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 11:05am

I think it would be absolutely fascinating to do a "CHORUS LINE PROJECT" where the creative team interviews dancers today and uses their stories as the basis for a new musical in the spirit of the original.

A lot of people have hypothecized that if Michael Bennett were still alive, he probably would never have revived ACL as a "period piece."

And I agree with other posters who say that Bennett's original staging should be preserved and seen by new generations, but in doing such an incredibly faithful recreation, its almost as if the original creative team feels that no other director could come up with new ideas or insights for the musical, and that's of course, not true.

I'd love to see what Tommy Tune or Ann Reinking - both dancer/choreographers from the ACL era would do with the piece.

Updated On: 7/28/06 at 11:05 AM

[morosco]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 11:12am

Good points you brought up metropolis10111.

[Kent]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 11:13am

"'Why should people pay 110 dollars to see this in New York when they could probably see pretty much the same thing at Casa Manana or The Muny for half the price?'

Because every touring production and local community production of ACL I have ever seen has SUCKED..."

JarNerdAV, you beat me to it.

I actually saw the recent Casa production in Ft. Worth and it was a MESS...especially the sound and lighting. And the Cassie was the worst I've ever seen. She could sorta act, barely sing and COULDN'T DANCE. In fact, I thought she was the worst dancer on the line. Just imagine how THAT played.
Updated On: 7/28/06 at 11:13 AM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 11:16am

But aren't most of these regional theatre productions that "suck" being directed by Baayork Lee or other people closely associated with the original production?

How would a Broadway production differ, if it is being directed/cast/and interpreted by the same people who are giving us the "sucky" regional productions....

[WonderBoy]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 11:29am

A) Michael Bennett, will you marry me? Yes, most of the regional productions and mini tours are being done by people very closely associated with the original. Either as original cast or members from the tape sessions who went into the show.

B)Metropolis10111 - I agree with a lot of what you said and I think you bring up a very valid point.

C) Elphaba.scares.me - I too have wondered the same thing. The timing just feels off for a revival/recreation.

There seems to me that the production team is a bit hypocritical by insisting that the original be re-created within an inch of its life yet, Diedre has been cast as Sheila, etc...

How sad would it be for one of the longest running shows in Broadway history to come back as a revival and flop! I don't want to witness that.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 11:30am

As to the musical direction/orchestration issue:

Jonathan Tunick (one of the original orchestrators) and composer Marvin Hamlisch have been in San Francisco doing some tinkering, but I doubt it'll be anything major.

[Kent]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 11:58am

Thanks Margo. I'm breathing a sigh of relief. Jonathan Tunick is brilliant, and (in my opinion) one of the primary reasons this show worked in the first place.

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 1:39pm

metropolis10111---I agree with what you said.

The only chance a "pure period" production of ACL has of succeeding is if all the people on stage know and understand the mindset, the behaviors, the sociology, the trends, the concerns, etc. of dancers and generally the PEOPLE (I keep saying that!) of 1975… and can convince a modern audience that they (on stage) are truly in that specific moment in time.

And that’s the real challenge. When the show was originally running it was easier to find a replacement Bobby or Maggie because once you found a strong enough singer/dancer that matched the “type,” they could just BE Bobby or Maggie. No performer today can truly do that, because it’s been 31 years now, and dancer-singers don’t look, sound, act or behave the way they did in 1975. So, now you have to find ACTORS (above all) that can affect a period character from another era convincingly. That’s the real challenge today.

It's not going to be enough to put on the authentic costumes, play the Wa-Wa guitar riffs in the pit orchestra, cast a few perfect dancers and sit back and watch the "magic" unfold.

I still think it's possible to have the show “as written” work, much as I SORT of like the idea of "A Chorus Line Project" or a more appropriately, "A Chorus Line, The Sequel." That would be its own unique adventure, but it wouldn’t be “A Chorus Line.”

I think the (potential) failure of any modern production lies in the fact that the audience must be pulled into the human moments on stage by the characters that are going through this grueling and revealing audition process. If they're only asked to sit back and be impressed with a group of singer-dancers stepping forward and “shining” for a few minutes each, that isn’t going to be enough.

More thoughts...

I can attend a play written in the ‘30s set in the Depression and understand enough and be transported by the action and the drama, if the cast is “human” and interesting enough to pull me in. And I have never lived through that era personally or suffered through the struggles, emotions, or dreams of that time period.

“A Chorus Line” should never be expected to thrive on its “periodness,” it should thrive on its humanity.

I believe that’s the only way it stands a chance. I don’t believe that it is so mired in whether or not we remember who Troy Donhue was, or The Red Shoes, that without these references being fully appreciated the show is doomed to be buried in the earth inside a time capsule. This isn’t Fiorello or Of Thee I Sing.

Even more thoughts...

I’m still thinking about how important the “human factor” is with this show. The reason Music and the Mirror stops (or SHOULD stop) the show has only partially to do with the song and dance itself. The dialogue at the beginning of the scene between Cassie and Zach should put us on the very edge of our seats before Cassie ever starts into the song and dance section of the number. We have to know and understand what is at risk here for this woman, and we have to sense the pain in Zach, even if we don’t see it. The tension should be so thick you can cut it with a knife, before the mirrors revolve and she goes into the heavy dance part. Then… you must have a dancer who can ACT while they dance. That’s what I remember most about McKechnie. Every time her arm went out or she spun around there was a communicated emotion connected to it. She never just danced. That’s why she could stop a show (and did, several times even before ACL). She connected on such a human level with her audiences, with every single movement she made. And that’s what really impressed me, not how high she kicked or how well she turned. It was how well she could SPEAK to us using dance.

EDIT: The irony here is that "Cassie" (the character) can't act, or so she tells Zach. One could even argue the point about McKechnie's own skills as an actress. "She was just playing herself." But I do remember as soon as she started dancing, she didn't become a leaping Baryshnikov... she became Meryl Streep.

Updated On: 7/28/06 at 01:39 PM

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 1:45pm

This is pretty off-topic at this point.

But I would love to hear more about Ann Reinking's Cassie. I wish there were someone on this board who saw her in the role.

I also wonder what Fosse thought about her going into Chicago's rival show? Also Fosse and Bennett were NOT fans of eachother, if I'm correct? It's pretty awesome that she played Roxie in Fosse's Chicago and Cassie in Bennett's Chorus Line.