Riedel, NY Post writes about "Addams Family" and "Come Fly With Me"

[joe5]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 9:50am

Happy Holidays !

http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/theater/addams_family_vacation_XxYVtZSsgVVPBlzEyuLiUL

Updated On: 12/23/09 at 09:50 AM

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 10:10am

Interesting. It seems like Riedel isn't joining the Fela bandwagon. As annoying as Riedel can be, historically he has a fairly good batting average (don't jump down my throat, I didn't say ALWAYS)in foreseeing what's going to happen. Let the games begin in earnest!!!

[BrianS]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 1:02pm

"It's also true that the creators... were always planning to take a break right after the opening. That way, they can come back and see it with "fresh eyes," as everybody likes to say.

Still, I don't know how you fix a troubled show in Chicago from your Garden Cottage at Eden Rock, St. Barts."

um, you don't. You take a break and view it with fresh eyes. I love that he won't even allow what he had written one sentence before to stop him from a snarky comment. Or that someone who has never created anything in the arts judges the value of getting some distance from a piece to better view how to fix it when you come back.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 1:20pm

RIEDEL and TWYLA sittin' in a tree
K I S S I N G.

He loves that woman.

I'm excited about COME FLY WITH ME.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 1:59pm

I love Twyla Tharp too, and I loved Movin' Out, and I loved Tharp's Sinatra Songs twenty years ago, and I'm excited about Come Fly With Me, but...

...Riedel forgets The Times They Are A-Changin'.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 3:22pm

I loved Movin' Out and saw it twice, but I just can't seem to muster up much enthusiasm for Come Fly With Me. I'm sure I'd enjoy it, but for some reason, it just doesn't seem as fresh and original to me, which was what I found intriguing about Movin' Out. But I hope my attitude will change as the production takes off on Broadway.

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 3:34pm

I'm looking forward to it. I was never a particular fan of Billy Joel and went to Movin' Out with some misgivings (saw it in preview). It made me a fan forever. And I'm particularly happy to see John Selya is involved -- he's really been under-used since Movin' Out and I hope this will provide him with the opportunity to shine once again.

[uncageg]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 3:40pm

I had 2 chances to see "Movin' Out" and passed. I like Billy Joel and own a lot of his music but wasn't interested in a show based on his music. I will, if I have the chance, see "Come Fly With Me". I grew up on Sinatra music and, for me, provides better music for the type of show she is presenting. Plus there is a nostalgic factor for me. JMO

[bk]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 4:16pm

"um, you don't. You take a break and view it with fresh eyes. I love that he won't even allow what he had written one sentence before to stop him from a snarky comment. Or that someone who has never created anything in the arts judges the value of getting some distance from a piece to better view how to fix it when you come back."

Do you suppose that's how some pretty legendary shows that were in trouble out of town got fixed? That their creators left town instead of addressing the problems and fixing them? The way in which theater works today is ridiculous. If a show was in trouble out of town, they fixed it if they could - then and there - wrote new songs, rehearsed 'em, and put 'em in the next day. Wrote new scenes, rehearsed them and put them in. Frequently the cast would be rehearsing the new material during the day and playing the old show at night. Fresh eyes. How about just some eyes seeing what's wrong and actually doing something about it while the show is playing, so you can see if the changes work? What a concept! That's what these engagements are supposed to be about, but they never are anymore. Riedel is absolutely correct when he says they don't fix anymore - they tweak. Only in rare exceptions these days do they actually make sweeping changes as in days of old. But there are too many things at play here - fool producers and too many of them, being at the mercy of computerized sets and lighting, and creators who go INTO a production all cocky because their workshops got great reaction. When you invite friends and family and nothing but friendly outside faces of course your workshop will get great reaction. They need to get rid of workshops and go back to the way it worked before. Workshops frequently cause more harm than good. Every show feels the same. Be daring - make changes - be different - don't follow the "now" rules (I always have to laugh when writers say, "But this has to happen here, and this kind of number happens here, and this arc and this journey" blah, blah, blah). Do you think Comden and Green or any of the wonderful book writers of old used words like arc and journey, do you think Styne and Sondheim said "What is the 'I want' song?"

Can you imagine South Pacific being done today as a NEW musical. The people who make the "now" rules would throw it out on the street. They'd say "what is that opening twenty minutes? We need a big establishing number, an 'I want' song," and we'd get the same old, same old. Every musical is its own thing. In trying to conform all you get is conformity.

Fresh eyes - get in there and do the damn work that needs to be done WHILE the show is running.
Updated On: 12/23/09 at 04:16 PM

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 4:21pm

'It seems like Riedel isn't joining the Fela bandwagon.'

Are you kidding? Riedel sang its praises before it moved to Broadway, and has written he's 'rooting' for it to succeed. Bill T. Jones has been featured on his TV show, 'Theater Talk,' and here's a backstage clip where he interviewed Jones.

And, yes, PalJoey, Riedel seems to have forgotten Tharp's 'The Times They Are A-Changin',' which he dogged at the time.
YouTube: Michael Riedel, backstage with Bill T. Jones

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 5:05pm

Wong, the way I read Riedel was that he was speculating that the Sinatra show would be the one to beat come Tony time. I did not say that Riedel disliked Fela, was dissing the show, etc., etc. Just that he made a comment that the Sinatra could be the one to beat. It is possible to like more than one show at a time yet think that one of them stood a better chance to win. And who knows? Maybe Addams Family will pull itself together. Everything is up in the air at this point.

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 5:07pm

He also wrote a few months ago that Sondheim on Sondheim could be a strong Tony contender.
Updated On: 12/23/09 at 05:07 PM

[sweetTb'way]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 5:42pm

I'm with bk on this one....you have to put the work in people! Go on vacation once you've made it the best product you possibly can.

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 5:47pm

Re: Sondheim on Sondheim. It looks very good on paper, but it's a Roundabout production, so I'm not holding my breath. Yet.

[James885]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 6:02pm

Well said Bk. Taking a break is not what's going to fix the show. Isn't the whole point of an out-of-town tryout to see what works and what doesn't so that changes can be made before the show arrives in NYC?

If what Riedel says is true, several directors have seen the show and given notes to the producers. The creative team needs to get their butts back to Chicago and work on their show.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 6:49pm

Will this be another Nick & Nora? N & N was one of the most anticipated new shows & we all know what happened to that.

Updated On: 12/23/09 at 06:49 PM

[TechEverlasting]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 7:53pm

" But there are too many things at play here - fool producers and too many of them, being at the mercy of computerized sets and lighting, and creators who go INTO a production all cocky because their workshops got great reaction."

Very well said bk. With all the damned moving scenery, vari-lites and other computerized nonsense it takes days to tech a few minutes of new material. There's little chance of the creative team making major changes out-of-town. The one time in my experience that a recent show was saved "out-of-town" was Disney's "Aida" in Chicago, and that took months and truckloads of cash.

The whole idea of out-of-town tryouts (and previews for that matter!) used to be that new songs and material could be tested out in front of paying audiences, and changes could be evaluated based on audience feedback. Of course a non-paying workshop audience filled with friends and investors is going to think everything is "brilliant".

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 8:10pm

Ed Mottershead, when you wrote, 'It seems like Riedel isn't joining the 'Fela' bandwagon,' it gave the impression that Riedel hadn't been supportive of 'Fela!,' which in fact it can be argued that he helped START the 'Fela!' bandwagon.

If we're gonna go with Riedel's predictions, he'll be the first to joke about how wrong he can be. In the 'Show Business' documentary, he claimed that 'Avenue Q' wouldn't last (after it'd opened recently on Broadway). He also predicted that the musical of 'The Producers' would flop. I'll agree with you on this: It's still too early. Lots of things can change.
Updated On: 12/23/09 at 08:10 PM

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 10:09pm

Actually, Riedel was a champion of THE TIMES THEY ARE A CHANGIN' out of town, there is a picture of him chumming it up with Twyla in San Diego, he commented that the show would probably come together in New York, the way MOVIN'OUT did, (he also predicted TONY noms for Arden and Sesma).
Then he had some positive things to say after the bloodbath of the New York critics, mentioning, again, Twyla's fortitude.

Does anyone know what changes Twyla made to MOVIN' OUT, I saw it in NYC many times and it was so special.

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 12/23/09 at 10:45pm

CurtainPullDowner, thanks for refreshing the memory. I guess I was recalling how Riedel wrote about how the ax was falling at 'Times They Are A-Changin' and its woes. ... Any hints of Tharp's past troubled shows ('Times,' 'Singin' in the Rain') were NOT in today's column.

Updated On: 12/23/09 at 10:45 PM

[tazber]

Posted: 12/24/09 at 12:27am

I love Riedel and he's right on about taking a vacation during an out of town engagement.

It's a chance to see what works and what doesn't (apparently a lot) and fix the problems.

Come April they'll have no one to blame but themselves if the show doesn't fare well with the critics.

[A Director]

Posted: 12/24/09 at 4:11am

In her excellent book, THE CREATIVE HABIT LEARN IT AND USE IT FOR LIFE, Twyla Tharp writes about the changes she made when Movin' Out was in Chicago.

[averagebwaynut]

Posted: 12/24/09 at 4:24am

[BK posted this same rant on another chat board so I've included my response here as well:]

I'm a bit mystified by the uproar here. If Riedel is even reporting the truth -- and to my knowledge, NONE of us verifiably know if he is -- it's clear both from what I saw onstage in Chicago, from what's been said on this board, and from what the critics said, that the show needs some fundamental structural and story changes. It's not the level of change that is just about going off and writing one new song or one new scene. This sort of change is not going to happen overnight.

And purely on a practical level, even if the authors had taken last week to do a first pass of extensive rewrites in consultation with a show doctor, with the holiday performance schedule they are playing in Chicago this week and next, there isn't really much time to put in changes until the week of January 4 anyway.

So where's the harm in having a show doctor come in and see the show during the week after it opened, having some creative meetings about what needs to happen, everyone going off to do the work that they each need to do over the holidays (from what's been said and from what I saw, that would be bookwriters, composer, choreographer) and then reconvening in Chicago on January 4 to begin implementing those changes (which I imagine will continue into the several weeks of rehearsals they have when they are back in New York)?

As for the collective critique of what OOT tryouts have become, I've responded to BK at length on that other board as well and it's not worth re-posting in its entirety here. But in short, what exactly is the alternative? The authors write the shows and the designers design the shows that call for effects that can only be accomplished with a certain level of technology. Whether we like it or not, 21st century audiences aren't satisfied by circa 1960's production value. So if that technology and production value hampers OOT tryouts, how can producers limit their financial exposure in developing a show that may not yet be fully completed? I agree -- don't just invite friends and family to workshops...but what else besides developmental productions, enhanced regional productions and bona fide OOT tryouts?

Updated On: 12/24/09 at 04:24 AM

[lizliz]

Posted: 12/24/09 at 7:39am

The process BK describes is what happened during the first month of previews in Chicago -- they rehearsed changes during the day and performed the show at night, frequently different versions because the new additions needed to be teched before they could be added. That was following a month-long tech process when they got to Chicago.

It's not realistic to expect they could continue that process during the entire Chicago run, and it certainly wouldn't be fair to the cast to continue working them on that schedule. As Riedel notes, everyone knew that the creatives were going to step away for a few weeks, come back and look at it with fresh eyes, and then be able to use the time between the Chicago try-out and Broadway to make those sweeping changes that everyone knows are coming. Seems to makes sense to me.

[devonian.t]

Posted: 12/24/09 at 1:44pm

The directors have crested dynamic and original gothic theatre in the past. Anyone sensing tied hands here?