So Pathetic

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 1:00am

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.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 1:09am

Now see I think it's actually one of the best structured musicals of the golden era and one that isn't dated or plodding at all.

Of course, I've only seen superb productions of it...

[allofmylife]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 1:55am

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.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 2:19am

SOUTH PACIFIC is one of the greatest shows ever written. Seemless book and score, though some scenes tend to drag during Act Two - it is one of the most gloriously written, utterly beautiful shows EVER. I don't understand how people can not see that.

[buffyactsing]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 3:14am

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.

[justme2]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 3:24am

I've only seen the 50's movie, and never liked it. The music, however, is a different story. Beautiful lyrics set to soaring music. I have tried many times to watch the movie, and just never understood all the love for this one. I remember especially disliking the colored gel effects.

[dancinfan]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 8:49am

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.)

[bschneid76]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 10:12am

The film version from the 50s is poorly done. But the score is still intact, but the OCR is wonderful. Bali Hai is a beautiful song, and there are many catchy tunes in it. So don't go by the 50s film.

[Elphaba]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 10:37am

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.

[allofmylife]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 10:51am

For a show in the 1940's to contain a song with lyrics such as "You've got to be taught to hate and fear/you've got to be taught from year to year/it's got to be drummed in your dear little ear/ you've got to be carefully taught" was very daring. Remember this was a time when half the country practised institutional discrimination (and half the other half turned a blind eye). Oscar Hammerstein didn't. And he'd been carefully taught!

[CTTheatreLvr]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 11:36am

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?

[sondheimboy2]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 7:51pm

Maybe I never have seen an excellent production of it, but when Pittsburgh's Civic Light Orchestra (a first class production, physically, though with only a week or two of rehearsal) did it a few years back, I was amazed by the lack of dramatic tension in the first act. It just seemed like one good number followed by another interrupted by a falling curtain.

Her breaking up with him because his children are "half-caste" seems unmotivated and just thrown in to have the act end with some conflict. There is no indication in the first act that she had a problem.

(I'm sure that if I pull out my copy of the libretto that I would find one. But, I did not catch it while watching it. And I like to think that I'm an observant theater goer.)

Though whenever I see it staged, during "There Is Nothing Like A Dame" I always wonder how many of the men singing it are gay and ponder just how big of a problem there not being any women on the island would be...

[Caroline-Q-or-TBoo]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 7:56pm

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

did anyone see the Pops program afterwards?

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 8:07pm

While driving in Hawaii a few years ago my wife started singing Bali Hai & Gonna Wash That Man Right Out Of My Hair with abandon

[jo]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 8:25pm

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 )

[Enjolras77]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 8:29pm

I love South Pacific and was totally enthralled by last night's concert. One of the first national tours I ever saw was this show with Robert Goulet as Emile DeBeque. I think it is Rodgers and Hammerstein's best all around score. There is not a weak number in the show.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 8:31pm

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.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 8:50pm

A first rate revival can do wonders for a show's stock.

Look how many posters here complained several months ago about Roundabout doing PAJAMA GAME. To their eyes it was a slow, boring dated musical. Their impressions probably based on seeing poor High School and community theatre productions. Now the revival has opened to great reviews, sell out business and these same people are complaining that they want to see it but can't get tickets.

Last night's PBS broadcast of the concert proved to me the show still has life and power. They judicious editing got the whole show down to 1 hour and 50 minutes, but even without sets or props it was tight and full of tension and for me each act ended very movingly.

The 1958 film is slow and plodding and not as well cast as it could have been. The TV version was also somewhat mis-cast (not so much Glen Close but the actor/non-singer that played DeBeque who had not charisma at all) but many of the changes they made to the text worked, at least in cinematic terms.

The R&H shows need a creative re-thinking. Look what the RNT did for CAROUSEL and the Australians did for KING AND I. I think it's time SOUTH PACIFIC was similarly renewed.

[dented146]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 9:54pm

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.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 9:55pm

And I still have no idea what it's about. Anyone care to hum a few bars?

[being.jeremiah]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 10:05pm

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

[inlovewithjerryherman]

Posted: 4/27/06 at 11:40pm

i also love this show. It's Rodgers and Hammerstein, the creators of the modern american musical, at the very top of their game.

I don't think it's their best show (Carousel will always be my favorite show of all time) but it's truly a masterpiece. Probably their most exciting and vibrant score.

[allofmylife]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 1:42am

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....

[DG]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 1:54am

Perspective: SOUTH PACIFIC is Andrew Lloyd Webber's favorite musical - he thinks it's perfect.

[TheBalladeer]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 2:24am

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