So Pathetic

Anyone else hate South Pacific? Maybe I haven't seen a good production, but I find it to be the most repetitive, lazily structured musical of the Golden Age. Some great songs, but I find the book to be a dated clunker that moves so slowly. Maybe the revival will improve on this.

I agree with Michael Bennett (or his amazing facimile). This show didn't win the Pulitzer Prize for nothing. Try to remember to set it in the context of the late 1940's, when even MENTIONING racial discrimination was quite a bold step. Then also remember the story was cobbled together from "Tales of The South Pacific" by James A. Mitchner. It wasn't called "TALE of the South Pacific" as there are at least three stories being interwoven here and it's an amazing job of linking them together because if memory serves me none of the characters interacted in the original. I think two of the stories were called "Fo A Dollar" and "Our Heroine". Can't remember the third Luther Billis was in....

I think on the whole it's a helluva show.

---

I only listened to the concert as I was writing a paper, and have shamefully never seen more than 5 minutes of the movie, but just listening to the music made me cry tonight. It's so lovely.

---

Several years ago, when everyone was doing S.Pac. because of its anniversary, I saw five productions in the span of a few weeks. Some were good, others not so good. But what it boils down to for me is that I don't care for the pace of the show, nor for the older man/younger woman storyline. There are so many other R&H shows I prefer that it would take a lot to get me to buy a ticket for S.Pac. again.

(I confess to liking the idea of Reba and Mitchell.)

when done right, it is an amazing show. Few songs have the meaning for me that 'This Nearly Was Mine' does, as we can all say that about something.
And I hate when people say things like "it's dated"......Everything is dated, and thank God........we are our history, and what a wonderful testament to the war in the South Pacific.......Art should be dated.
RENT is dated, West Side Story is dated, and I love them both.

---

I remember "You've got to be carefully taught" as being longer than it was on last night's concert. Is my memory just fading?

it's not one of my favs. But i love love loved that production last night!

did anyone see the Pops program afterwards?

---

Not having been to the USA before that time, I had only seen the movie version of SOUTH PACIFIC( which I loved - because of the songs, the comedy, the beautiful scenery, and because I had a huge crush on John Kerr - LOL). It was a wonderful movie -one that entertained in that era (wasn't it released in the early 60's). The songs were tuneful, romantic, haunting, rousing ( I always remember Sean Connery saying that one of his first jobs was being in the chorus of the production, singing THERE IS NOTHING LIKE A DAME) and the characters were fascinating.

I even read the book TALES OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC by James Michener, to see how it had inspired such a movie.

When I first came to NYC ( after school somewhere else in America), one of the first things I saw onstage was a revival of SOUTH PACIFIC onstage at the New York State Theatre at the Lincoln Center ( not sure, but was that one with Florence Henderson?). I was midly disappointed -- I thought, like the movie THE SOUND OF MUSIC, it didn't compare well when being staged live. Because I thought the sets were important to the story - it has to give you the feeling that you were in this side of the world which is often written as paradise.

Sorry, for being off-tangent...

But South Pacific will always hold very special memories for me.


Jo( who lives by the Pacific, here in Southeast Asia )

The production I saw opened with "Bloody Mary" followed by "Nothing Like a Dame" and "Bali Ha'i". Then they transitioned into the scene with Nellie and Emile. I liked that structure a lot better. obviously, people are going to be more accustomed to which ever version they saw first, but for me that was a much better structure and I wouldn't want to see it done any other way. it was flawless, and it is in my opinion very difficult to bring a flawless South Pacific to the stage. it is dated, but there are parales that I hope everyone can find if they look hard enough within themselves and also at the world we live in today.

the show itself is brilliant, but I think it comes along with a stigma that most everyone has seen a bad production of South Pacific and the actors have to hurdle over that obstacle in order to show the audience what a great lesson it really is.

For many of the people of my generation and most of the people who lived through WWII, South Pacific is the standard used to measure every other musical. Oklahoma was terrific. Guys and Dolls stupendous; but SP touched so many nerves. Everyone could identify with the story they had,in differing ways,lived. The music is wonderful and the lyrics broke ground.

Styles change,as do morals. It's a shame that all South Pacific revivals are not good because the musical is a masterpiece.

If I am not mistaken, a South Pacific revival will be produced by Lincoln Center Theatre during the 2007-2008 season.

I have a copy of the program from the Brighton Pavillion, where Sean Connery played in the chorus. He was only in the post-west end tour, apparently. However, young Larry Hagman did play with his mother, Mary Martin in the Drury Lane production.
If someone could tell me how to attach a picture in this forum, I'd be more than glad to post a scan of the program....

---

I don't see how anyone could not like South Pacific....maybe they haven't seen a good production of it. I have seen quite a few of them, professional and amateur, and I still think that as a musical theatre piece, it still holds up, no matter who the players are, and how it is directed. It is such a well written show, and the score is just one show-stopper after another.

I enjoyed Reba McEntire and Brian Stokes Mitchell's performance very much, by the way.

However, I have to admit, the one musical of Rodgers and Hammerstein that never appealed to me, is "Oklahoma". I understand the importance of it in musical theatre history, and that it was ground-breaking in its time, but I always found the plot and the songs, with the exception of "I Cain't Say No" quite boring, and unappealing. Maybe someone can explain to me what is appealing about it.

However, I find South Pacific to be Rodgers and Hammerstein's best work.

Cheers,

The Balladeer

---