SING STREET @ NYTW — Page 2

Kids playing instruments - so 13 and School or Rock...

Ok, but to Sing Street - I've seen the movie. I thought it was "cute" but "meh" - so not excited about a stage presentation, but you never know. In any event, I am curious about how they will do the music video montage sequences. But, it's not novel for kids to play instruments - but it's essential to the plot.

If the characters are starting a band, they damn well better play the instruments!! It’s not a theatrical concept. It should be a requirement.

Saw the first preview tonight and really loved it! A few quibbles here and there, some larger than others, but none of them drastically taking away from the show. Overall I thought it was really well-written, charming, and emotionally engaging. I like the movie a lot too, and I think the show captures the film’s charm, and in several areas I think the show improves on the film. The ending, in particular, is really moving. I’d say it’s in really good shape considering it’s the first preview.

I do think the show as a whole feels like a musical, but act 1 feels more like a play with music. Very few songs, and almost all of them diegetic. But I liked this choice because it felt like they couldn’t really sing until the characters found their own musical voices within the story. Also, I appreciate when a show is willing to allow the book-scenes to breathe and have their own life.

Taichman’s work on this show feels very grounded and nuanced. I would urge anyone watching the show to keep your eyes open for little wordless character moments that happen in background or on the extreme sides of the stage.

I thought the performances were strong all around, except that the girl playing Raphina isn’t much of a singer. Still, she acted the role very well. The lead kid is very good, as is the brother.

And for anyone curious: if this show were to transfer, it would almost certainly NOT be eligible for best score. Most of the songs are from the film, and several of the additional songs were written for the film but cut. I’m not sure how those are counted with regards to Tony eligibility, but either way I don’t think they reach 50% new material. This isn’t a criticism of the show - I thought the songs were utilized really well (mostly). I’m just saying I don’t think it will be Tony-eligible. Thankfully, the “80’s hits” are used very sparingly - this isn’t an 80s jukebox musical.

The show got out at 9:23 tonight (after a 7:00 curtain). So it was a little under 2.5 hours.

Was at the first preview tonight, and I’m bracing myself for this thread to light up like a Christmas tree.

It’s absolute magic. I was moved in ways I haven’t in a very long time. The performances, the material, the style - it’s a bit masterful. The aesthetic of the piece is so clear, raw and subtle; the show has an elevated taste to it that will appeal to both high-brow theatre* fans, and those of the film.

For a show about kids, this is probably the most mature and devastating musical I’ve seen since The Band’s Visit & Once. And yet, it manages to have the unabashed optimism and joy of like Moulin Rouge.

To me, this is everything I want in a musical. There’s zero fluff - every moment is used with specificity and purpose. Enda’s book refuses it to become a melodrama, but it’s as far from a stereotypical family drama as you can get.

My only complaint is that the actors are a bit hard to hear when singing with the band. Every performer is almost always on stage, and all play instruments, so I can imagine it’ll take a week or 2 to figure out acoustics.

Regarding the design, Bob Crowley hit it out of the park with a very simple set up that exposes most of NYTW. The ensemble sits on the sides, and all the instruments are on wheels. Sonya’s movement has them float through the space constantly - it’s beautiful. The lighting is stark white for the majority of the show, save for a few rare moments of color that hit you like a train.

So, yeah. I’m sure everyone will have their opinions but overall this is a home run for me. Cannot wait for this to blow up.

Last thing I’ll add - the kid who plays the lead needs to get a publicist and ensure he is shaking the right hands during Tony season. He never leaves the stage, plays an instrument the entire night, and goes through some fcking wild emotions for someone his age. He could totally win Best Actor. Would love to see it.

Updated On: 11/25/19 at 10:30 PM

Unexpectedly, got to see this tonight, and having never seen the film, I have no basis for comparison.

My reaction is a bit more tempered than some others. I liked it quite a bit, but it's not ready for primetime, by a long shot.

This has a lot of potential, but the book needs a ton of work. The music is great and the cast is uniformly excellent, save one. She, jarringly, can't sing. Everyone else is wonderful.

I also thought that the first act was more of a play with music. The second act seemed more of a traditional musical.

My issues with the book are the superficiality of it all. We never get enough character development to become emotionally invested in any of them. I found myself reacting to individual situations, but not connecting to anybody. I kept hoping to learn more about the “bad boy” character (forget his name), but I never did. This was my era of music and growing up and I had a hunch that he was me, but I never found out. It goes like that for every character.

Again, I have no basis for comparison to the film, which I knew nothing about except it took place in Ireland. But,there is nothing at stake, here. There's little melodramatic moments between the schoolmaster and the kids or between both parents or the sister we know nothing about, but we never once get the sense we're in Ireland (save the accents), there is nothing, except some throwaway lines, to indicate what was actually happening in Ireland in the early 80s. The book is filled with throwaway lines that ‘set the scene’, if you will, but lack any depth at all.

The story lacks an arc, so that when the end comes, it falls flat. It also isn't much of an ending and certainly not earned, emotionally.

Trying to avoid any spoilers, but there are odd things that made no sense or seemed like ideas that were dropped and just shards of those ideas remain.

I agree about watching the actors not directly in certain scenes. I noticed it, as well, and it only adds to how good the cast is.

I liked this, but I didn’t love it. If the book can be fixed, this does have the makings of a really great show.

Is Brown Shoes not in the musical?

I was also at the first preview last night and I'll be in the dissenting opinion on this board that while I thought the show was exploding with charm, I think that it has a ways to go before reaching any true greatness (though the potential is absolutely there). I agree with much of wolfwriter's thoughts, so just want to echo those before writing my own.

I think the biggest hurdle the show is facing right now is that the book isn't hitting any level of profundity yet. I think it's a really fascinating concept to explore the juxtaposition of escapism and positivity against the economic and psychological depression of Ireland in the 1980s, but right now the show is basking in escapism too much, which is also a big critique I have of the film. Right now the most interesting and rich part of the show is Taichman's direction of Brendan (the older brother), and I want the entire show to be explored in the same way. If I were on the creative team, I would push for the book to dig deeper into the characters and live more in a state of exploring depression in relation to the youthful escapism that these boys are living in with the band. I absolutely would not mind 20+ minutes of material being added on in order to accomplish this, and to me it's vital work. The characters I would love more development with would be Barry (the bully), Anne (the sister), both parents, and Brother Baxter feels particularly underdeveloped to me and there are a lot of melodramatic moments with him that occur without much grounding.

Musically the piece is nothing special at the moment. The majority of the songs are pulled directly from the film, so it's fun watching these boys play 80s hits and the handful of original songs written into the piece. But the kids aren't particularly great musicians and it's definitely holding the music back a bit. Don't get me wrong, the kids aren't BAD, but their lack of serious technique and abilities leaves out advanced parts that could absolutely exist in the orchestrations if the skill levels were higher. The standout musician is the older friend on lead guitar, and he appears almost jarringly older than the rest of the boys and it makes me think the creative team had to cast older in order to have someone with legit musicianship in the cast. There're also some messy moments in the score right now, particularly the Rio Quartet in Act I and the Conor/Brother Baxter mash-up song in Act II. But a lot of great work is being done as well and I don't want to undermine the show too much. It's solid music work, but it can and should be taken to a greater level before a transfer happens.

The cast is pretty great all around. All of the boys are very charming, particularly Gian Perez who steals some moments quite a few times throughout the piece. Gus Halper is particularly wonderful as Brendan, really being the emotional anchor of the piece. Brenock O' Connor is also fantastic as Conor, providing a pretty astonishing performance of charm and depth for someone of his age. If it transfers, I'd expect Tony noms for both. Like others have said, I think Zara Devlin is significantly weaker than the rest of the cast, particularly when it comes to singing. She fits the role well, but I don't think the positive casting choices outweigh the negatives. If this transfers, I think a serious conversation would need to be had about whether she'd need to be recast for Broadway. I could only imagine what the tourists would think when many are just looking for an outstanding singing voice to listen to for a few hours for their Broadway show.

Right now Sing Street just feels a bit like Once recycled with significantly less depth. And some may say that it's unfair to compare the two, but they so clearly exist in the same world to me. Same film director, same creative team, same use of musical storytelling. This production uses many of the same structural and technical techniques as the Once stage adaptation, and this production doesn't feel like it has its own unique voice yet. It reminds me a bit of the situation with Dazed and Confused and Everybody Wants Some if anyone on this board is familiar with the movies: Linklater essentially created the same movie twice just placed in different settings and having different characters. And while Everybody Wants Some is absolutely a fine movie, Dazed and Confused is just so profoundly better that I feel no reason to ever return to the other.

I'll be seeing this again after it opens in a few weeks because I really do want this to succeed. Hoping my thoughts are more positive next time around, but we'll see how much it changes throughout previews. Eager to hear from others as its run continues on.

Updated On: 11/26/19 at 10:21 AM

A good source tells me Sing Street's Spring transfer to the Lyceum has already been signed.

---

JBroadway said: "I completely disagree with those of you who say the show is lacking in depth and character development. It’s true that not all of these characters get huge moments in the spotlight. And if I were just reading the script for this show, I might agree with you.

But I think the combined work of Walsh, Taichman, the songwriters, and the cast, manages to add up to fully realized characters. We may not know every fact about their history and the way they live, but I felt like they all got small but pivotal moments that cut to the core of their inner struggle, and show how they change over the course of the show. And I personally found the themes and character arcs very moving."

I agree with a lot of what Ledaero says. I obviously know far less musically than Ledaero does, but I thought the 'grittiness' was intentional and meant to reflect the new wave/punk esthetic of the time. In retrospect, maybe not.

JBroadway, I'm glad you liked this more than I did, but, honestly, I'm a bit lost on the depth you found. Everybody is escaping something, but we are never shown what they're escaping. Spoilers are unavoidable here, so please don't read if you don't know the story and are going to see it:

If I understand, greenifyme2 tried to convince their husband to watch the film first, but the creative team should assume nobody has seen the film. The stage version shouldn't rely on the screen version. I'm with Ledaero, I would add 20-30 minutes and flesh this all out.

If they can re-work the book, they can turn this from a charming show, into a great one, and I really hope they do.

JBroadway said: "@wolfwriter - are your questions rhetorical, or are you genuinely asking? I feel like most of them are answerable based on what’s already in the text of the show (not just the film). Though some of your questions (ex. “Why should we care?&rdquo are solely subjective, obviously."

@JBroadway: They're not rhetorical at all. I didn't get answers to any of those questions. Of course, you're right about 'caring'. That's up to each individual.

Now, you have me wondering if I dozed off. LOL

The parents, the kiss, the daughter, the Brother with a capital B and the brother with the lower case b. Throwaway lines don't really provide depth and in some cases, like the kiss, there's not even a throwaway line to explain.

What should our takeaway about Ireland in the early 80s be? I know the history, but I'm sure many don't, especially younger folks.

I don't want to be repetitive or beat a dead horse and I certainly don't want to rain on anyone's love for the show. I just see a lot of potential here and I really want to see them fix some issues to make it great.



Now, if somebody would just do a stage version of 'The Commitments'

greenifyme2 said: "JBroadway said: "@wolfwriter - are your questions rhetorical, or are you genuinely asking? I feel like most of them are answerable based on what’s already in the text of the show (not just the film). Though some of your questions (ex. “Why should we care?&rdquo are solely subjective, obviously. "

Yes most of those answers are in the show. Why would you ask why the parents are splitting up when it’s discussed several times by many characters? Filling in the blanks seems pretty obvious to me- financial hardship being one of them, alone is enough to put that kind of strain on many relationships- not to mentioned the actual reason that is stated 3 times.

Keep in mind part of the reason I asked my husband to watch the movie first is that I was part of the casebook group and my entire view the last 9 weeks was observing the process from movie to stage so I was invested in that perspective."

I was going to answer but you beat me to it. Understanding what the family is going through makes many situations self-explanatory and the characters do very good job explaining themselves too.

Answering wolfwriter's questions against my better judgement, partly because it boggles my mind that the answers aren't obvious to him and partly because I'm wondering if others have different answers.

From my perspective:

wolfwriter said: "Thanks for taking the time, greenifyme2. I read what you wrote, twice, and most of isn't in the show. It might be in the film, but most of what you wrote is your guess. It's how you filled in the blanks and that's totally okay. Please don't think I'm trying to be difficult or snarky. I'm not. I liked this enough to care about them getting it right. I won't drag this out beyond this. We're not going to agree, but I like reading your thoughts and the thoughts of others and reflecting on what I saw.

I wish I had a current copy of the script to quote actual lines. There is a line how there is no work for architects in Ireland at the moment.
But interested to hear other’s thoughts.
















"