Shows that have won best musical but were not particularly good?- Page 2

[newintown]

Posted: 6/30/11 at 1:17pm

Titanic was a beautiful, moving piece of theatre. It deserved its Tony. It may just have been too highbrow for some audiences.

[IdinaBellFoster]

Posted: 6/30/11 at 1:19pm

^ Thank you.

Also, if you're ever lucky enough to be in the show, singing the score gives you an even bigger appreciation for the score.

[madbrian]

Posted: 6/30/11 at 1:19pm

In my opinion, Spamalot was significantly inferior to the three other nominated shows (Piazza, Spelling Bee, Scoundrels).

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 6/30/11 at 1:58pm

Actually, I'm 51. I didn't see the original production of Man of La Mancha, which I would guess was notable mostly for Richard Kiley's legendary performance.

Instead, my votes were based on my opinions of the shows themselves, their scores and books. The original poster may have been asking about the productions which won best musical, rather than the musicals themselves. I interpreted it the other way and may have been totally off subject.

Jerome Robbins Broadway was, in my opinion, a not very good revue, in spite of the many great numbers in it. I judged it on its structure as a revue, which I found trite.

In some cases a show on my list may have still been the best show that season, and so may have actually deserved the tony, but the question wasn't which shows that have won best musicals and not deserved to be called the best musical of that season, the question asked for shows that have won best musical but were not particularly good.

I am not familiar with absolutely every show that has gotten best musical, I doubt many people are, so my list is provisional. For instance, I have never seen Spring Awakening or Memphis, nor have I heard their score in their entirety, so either of these shows may have ended up on my list for all I know if I knew them better.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 6/30/11 at 2:04pm

One more thing, I am not a big Starmites fan. I have no problem with JRB winning the tony over Starmites, for heaven's sake.

I wasn't comparing JRB to Starmites, I was merely saying that the ten shows I listed weren't "particulary good" musicals, in comparison not to the show/shows they competed against in their seasons, but to the shows that have been awarded best musical, the great majority of which are, in my opinion, "particularly good" shows, as were a great many shows that were nominated against those great shows and, deservedly or not, didn't win.

Posted: 6/30/11 at 9:34pm

You're certainly entitled to your opinion-as this is a question based solely on opinion, sorry if I made it sound personal in my post. I do have one more question though :P In yoyur comment about Jerome Robbins Broadway, you ssay: "a not very good revue, in spite of the many great numbers in it. I judged it on its structure as a revue, which I found trite."

So even comparing it to other revues you find it trite? I find that kinda odd--I can't really think of any other revue I'd ever rather see, personally. I mean fully staged, cohesively presented, numbers from one of Broadway's greats--in many cases with rare opportunities like to see the Bathing Beauties Ballet or reconstructed (as much as possible) On the Town choreography? Or do you just not like dance based revues?

[bmwpjager]

Posted: 6/30/11 at 10:16pm

...really? Am I the only one who thinks "The Wiz" is one of the worst musicals BY FAR? I mean, parts of the score are great, but the book isn't only horribly demeaning, it's just bad...

[dramamama611]

Posted: 7/1/11 at 1:37am

I liked Titanic a great deal as well.

That's the problem with these kind of "questions", it's just someone's opinion. Every show that someone dislikes, also has it's fans -- it's just the way life goes.

Posted: 7/1/11 at 1:40am

I don't care for The Wiz and I'm a big Oz freak--although I understand it's original production was small and charming, and I know I can't judge it by that monstrous movie. But the score does nothing for me. How is it demeaning though--aside from any objections to the very concept of specific Black shows?

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/1/11 at 12:22pm

Hi, Eric, of course, no offense taken, and sorry if it sounded like it was.

Here's some examples of revues I preferred to JRB: Ain't Misbehavin' (a best musical tony winner), Jacques Brel is Alive and Well and Living in Paris, Berlin to Broadway with Kurt Weill, And the World Goes Round, New Faces of 1952.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 7/1/11 at 12:29pm

I'm not a fan of The Wiz, but I can understand how it won Best Musical that season. It was very much a product of its time.

Loved Titanic. I thought it was beautifully staged and contains one of the most gorgeous scores I've ever heard. The orchestrations and musical direction were incredible.

Of the shows I've seen, the Best Musical winners I didn't like at all were The Producers and Spring Awakening.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/1/11 at 12:48pm

Also, Eric, I don't have any problem with dance based revues. I don't consider JRB a dance-based revue per se. JRB was more a production-number based revue, with many scenes celebrating Robbins' work not as a choreographer as much as his work as a musical stager. Many segments from his shows showcased in JRB were not dance numbers. My JRB demerits have more to do with the mundane use of a host as if it were a variety show, the "and then he staged" aspect of it, the lack of a coherant theme other than presenting the great showman's triumphs, etc. And mostly, for me to see the Fiddler dream scene and the dance at the gym scene from West Side Story out of context of their entire works was, for me, a dilution and uninteresting.

But, hey, it's just my opinion.

Finally, I didn't say JRB was bad. Nor do I think it is. I simply don't find it a "particularly good" best musical tony winner.

[goldenboy]

Posted: 7/2/11 at 1:49am

The biggest problems with Titanic
1) we know how it ends
2) the score puts me to sleep
3) there is no tension
4) YOu don't care about anyone.
5) Where is the tap number and the chorus girls??

The Life was so much better and it lost to Titanic that year.

[IdinaBellFoster]

Posted: 7/2/11 at 2:52am

The fact that you know how it ends works to the show's advantage; it put's a somber overtone onto songs like 'I Must Get on That Ship' they seem so happy, only to have their dreams crushed.

Tension? Have you heard 'The Blame'? You care about many characters, yes there are far too many for any deep deep character/book work, but Ida & Isador Strauss, Kate McGowin & Jim Farrell amongst others are big audience favorites.

And if we're really going to go there, 'Doing the Latest Rag's is a large chorus number.

[AngusN]

Posted: 7/2/11 at 5:28am

I loved the music and scriptfor Spring Awakening, I just didn't like the production. The Brechtian technique of performers using microphones was irritating. The recent UK tour of the show, illustrates just how amazing this show could be in the right hands.

[AngusN]

Posted: 7/2/11 at 5:28am

I loved the music and scriptfor Spring Awakening, I just didn't like the production. The Brechtian technique of performers using microphones was irritating. The recent UK tour of the show, illustrates just how amazing this show could be in the right hands.

[Gypsy9]

Posted: 7/2/11 at 6:24am

Henrikegerman: You find the use of a narrator in JEROME ROBBINS' BROADWAY to be a problem, likening it to a variety show. But it merely was a device to explain to the audience what they were about to see and to a put things in context. Alternately, the creators of JRB could have elected to use placards at both sides of the stage with electronic signs signifying each scene's specifics. But some form of exposition was needed to put things in context. In my opinion FOSSE! suffered because it had neither a narrator or electronic signs and I was forever getting confused as to what the hell was happening on stage.

[Urban]

Posted: 7/2/11 at 8:48am

Err... my comment about 'Starmites' was a joke. Seriously - little smilie face :) and all. I thought it was pretty obvious... oh well

[DMsquared2]

Posted: 7/2/11 at 2:37pm

OK. Two Gentlemen of Verona. This show is completely a product of its time. I've been in it. It's fun but has some of the worst lyrics of all time. This is the show that beat Follies.

Posted: 7/2/11 at 9:32pm

Henwirkegerman, that makes a lot of sense, and I really appreciate you explaining. I think we'll have to agree to disagree, but you are right that ti wasn't particularly imaginative in concept. Something I personally probably prefered.

Gypsy--like I said in another thread, I agree with you about the Fosse problem, though it was still worth it to see those dances live. But please don't tell me Fosse actually has an exclamation point at the end. *shudder*

[Gypsy9]

Posted: 7/3/11 at 9:13am

Eric, I really am not sure about the exclamation mark after FOSSE. If true then I agree with you that it is annoying.

Do you remember whether FOSSE contaIned the terrific number from the original producion of LITTLE ME called the "Rich Kids' Rag" or something like that. I was lucky to have seen the 1962 LITTLE ME with the legendary Sid Ceaser, Virginia Martin and Nancy Andrews. It remains the funniest musical I have ever seen. Ceaser was brilliant, as was Fosse's choreography.

[Jay94]

Posted: 7/3/11 at 9:48am

I think that Two Gentlemen of Verona won because they felt like they had snubbed Hair.

[gvendo2005]

Posted: 7/3/11 at 10:20am

^ Agreed. I will say that I personally find Two Gents underrated. I know, get the stones ready.

[Smaxie]

Posted: 7/3/11 at 10:28am

FOSSE did not include "Rich Kid's Rag". In general, that show concentrated on a lot of Fosse's later, more cynical work instead of his earlier, joyous and comic choreography and it just made Fosse the choreographer seem limited and repetitive. It all became a bit relentless. Another fatal decision was cutting "Beat Me Daddy Eight to the Bar" from BIG DEAL while they were out of town (though it remained as the curtain call music).

[pinoyidol2006]

Posted: 7/3/11 at 11:34am

I loved:
In the Heights (because I'm an immigrant)
Spring Awakening (because I was 16 when I saw it)
Jersey Boys (because I love the Four Seasons)

I know they're not the best shows out there. But I'm only 20, so I haven't really been around to see the really "great" shows that theater snobs like to point to. But I had a great deal of fun watching those shows. They're not Sondheim or Rodgers and Hammerstein, but they brought me a lot of joy and made me appreciate the theater. I can't say that Billy Eliot or Memphis gave me a similar good time, but I'm sure those shows touched the hearts of other theater-goers--even if those theater-goers were annoying NY tourists. However, I'm not gonna say that they're the best shows ever, because they're not.