Show of the Decade — Page 2

Yes, spider, you are right.

But I don't see how that post is necessarily "worshiping' Sondheim.
Maybe I am just stupid for thinking that the theatre's natural evolution would have eventually lead to Oklahomaesque shows.

---

These are my reasonings for picking what I picked - I'm afraid people won't understand what my goal was in doing this, so here's my insight:

Oklahoma! - I picked OKLAHOMA because it was the first great American musical, and the first hugely successful commercial musical with songs at the top of the charts and on the radio. Plus, it was the first show to ever record an album. It was also one of the first shows that began the formulaic process of putting together musicals - a certain amount of song, a certain amount of love story, a certain amount of ballet, a certain amount of comedy. It started what so many shows tried to accomplish - Carousel, Brigadoon, etc.- and in my opinion, completely succeeded at.

The Music Man - The first truly great musical with a solid, perfect book and score, seamlessly put together. Again, with songs at the top of the charts. This wasn't an easy year for me - GUYS AND DOLLS and WEST SIDE STORY were extremely close seconds, if not a tie.

Hair - The first rock musical. It would forever change the musical possibility that rock and roll music can actually form a brilliant, moving, workable show. So many shows in the future would create a rock score hoping it would follow the success of HAIR, but none have succeeded. Also, the shows' messages and themes, although specific to Vietnam, transcend any time period and essentially remain timeless.

Sweeney Todd - Like Priest say, literally the OKLAHOMA of the later part of the 20th century. Much like HAIR changed the image of musical theatre, SWEENEY took it in the complete other direction stretching it in every imagineable direction with one of the most brilliant scores and amazing themes. Much like OKLAHOMA and SHOWBOAT, it transformed musical theatre and how people looked at it. Many people are saying A CHORUS LINE, but in my opinion, A CHORUS LINE was an amazingly successful show, obviously, but didn't do anything extraordinary to advance musical theatre as an art form.

Les Miserables - Obviously not my favorite musical of the 1980's, but I chose it because it was the first huge, overproduced London import mega success that would set the stage for MISS SAIGON, CATS, PHANTOM, and other later shows of less significance. It set the asthetic standards on Broadway in the 1980's incredibly high - aside from it's brilliant score and moving story. While I love SUNDAY more than anything, I don't feel it did anything to transform the form - certainly not more than LES MIS, or maybe even DREAMGIRLS.

RENT - I don't really need to explain this one, it's quite obvious what RENT has done for musical theatre. Many say RAGTIME - while I won't argue that RAGTIME is wonderful, in my opinion, it was not groundbreaking in any way. THE LION KING would be a close second for me.

HAIRSPRAY - Mamma Mia is a close second - not because I like it (I hate it, in fact,) but for what is has set the stage for in terms of audience-friendly, jukebox musicals. I chose HAIRSPRAY because it is an impeccable example of seamless musical theatre comedy with a new, fresh sounding pop score. I can certainly understand URINETOWN, and certainly agree. I do not agree with, however, THE PRODUCERS or WICKED.

Just my two cents...

---

No show is more INFLUENTIAL than Oklahoma (other than perhaps Showboat). After 1943, the notion that books should have some substance, should be fully integrated with the score, that songs should move forward plot and/or enrich character, that dance could also be used to carry the plot forward all became de riguer. It's not about natural evolution -- the show seemed to come out of nowhere and overnight changed Broadway forever (it also was the first musical to run THOUSANDS of performances -- unheard of at that time). Even old tin pan alley holdovers like Berlin and Porter felt the pressure to write scores specific to character and plot after Oklahoma (and came up with the greatest shows of their careers, Annie Get Your Gun and Kiss Me Kate, respectively). Oklahoma truly CHANGED the musical theatre for the better and influenced nearly every show since.

Sweeney Todd is a great musical and one of the crown jewels of the genre, but I don't really see its great influence over the musical as an artform. Great? yes. Influential? Not so much.

To be considered influential, a show must have had a bunch of imitators in its wake (i.e I'd call Mamma Mia a very influential show considering the how many jukebox musicals have come and are coming to Broadway -- Mamma Mia wasn't the first, but it's the most successful; Great? NO .... Influential? Very, though I'm not sure that it's influenced the genre for the better like Oklahoma and Showboat did).

There's hardly been a spate of shows similar to Sweeney Todd since 1978, mostly because few, if any, composers have Sondheim's compositional skills. Frankly, it's almost a one-off and other than Sondheim himself, few others have written anything else similar to it or that even approaches its complexity.

---

I agree MArgo - I HATE jukebox musicals...so I guess it's Mamma Mia's fault...at teh same time, it attracted a lot of people to the theatre.

Munk - we don't always have to disagree....

I would only say Wicked because of how many people it attracted to the theatre -

Nevertheless, Urinetown, Full Monty, some others in your list in your first post, have MUCH better scores.

By the way, sorry to take this off topic, I have been listening to Avenue Q and Wicked a lot...I hate to say htis, but Avenue Q is getting on my nerves. I love the show, seen it twice, but it is just getting on my nerves, sorry.


BACK on topic:

I understood your purpose, Munk, I just didn't feel like going with the rules, following the guidelines, lol.

But I do like you a little more that you said Les Mis....

Margo - Very good point. I sort of jotted down my answers quickly, but I definitely should have listed Oklahoma as my one show, don't know why I didn't. Although I'm not a fan of OKLAHOMA, I do apprectiate what it has done.

---

Well, Les Mis is a rock opera...and obviously Opera's have been around for a long time...the shows of the Ancient Greeks and of Shakespeare were musicals....but not to the same extent as today.

I think I like Sweeney better than Oklahoma anyway....

Delusional.
That's me.
Trying to give Sweeney more credit than it deserves, i guess.
Sigh.

---

What do you guess think hurt the theatre the most?

I know, this is negatively the complete opposite of the thread, but I think it is as important as which was most beneficial, no?

Bringing Opera into the discussion, I just feel that Sweeney was influential in its making composers/lyricists step back and realize that the lines/differences between operas and musicals weren't/didn't have to be as sharp and distinct as once thought.

---

Updated On: 2/8/05 at 11:24 PM

Ok, I agree with you there Priest.

---

I saw the most wonderful production of Sweeney at the Lyric Opera of Chicago. Sondheim obviously influenced one of the greatest opera companies to produce his "musical."

I really wish more people were participating in this....

Margo, would you mind listing yours?

---

Am I 180 degrees wrong in this thinking, Margo?
I would love your opinion.

Perhaps I am digging way to deep and becoming overly dramatic, but I feel that anytime a great, great, great show comes along (Oklahoma, Carousel, Guys and Dolls, West Side Story, Sweeney) that subconciously it effects the work after it in hidden ways. That every show has some part of its DNA linked to those shows that define the musical theatre genre. As if all the superlative shows through the years are almost the progenitors of shows written afterwards.

And subconciously I feel Sweeney had a great effect.

Do you kinda see where I'm coming from Margo?
Or am I just spurting out overly dramatic fallicies?

---

Updated On: 2/8/05 at 11:32 PM