Spring Awakening — Page 2

The production is fantastic. You really have to see it.

Ok so far I have not gotten an answer to my original question. I did not intend to assault Spring Awakening and be attacked by the fan base, but inevitably this is exactly what has happened. So let me ask again: why is Spring Awakening so great?

Great acting, fantastic singing and songs are good reasons, but frankly they are not nearly specific enough. If an actor/composer is featured on broadway for an extended period of time, the chances are incredibly great that said person is very talented.

I want to know why I should go see Spring Awakening.

What is the underlying theme of the musical?

What can I learn from the plot and characters?

What intrinsic values does this show uphold?

Please don't bash me for making judgements based on a synopsis. Currently I live so far away from New York that there is no way I can see a show whenever I please. If I could see Spring Awakening tonight I would. But since I am rarely able to see shows, and since when I do it is only a few shows at a time, I try my best to get a feel for the show before I spend any money.

So once again I ask you, Spring Awakening fans, why should I see this show?

---

yostertag, there were many very intelligent and detailed reviews in the press when the show opened (and since). How about reading those (or even search this site for much detailed discussion) instead of just trying to cause trouble here and making SA fans justify and defend themselves with analyses worthy of "Richard III". (You are not interested in learning more about the show. You just want to push buttons right here, and no one is taking your bait. Your credibility was shot from the start. You can't engage people in intelligent conversation and ask them to take the time and effort to share their opinions, by crudely insulting their taste right off the bat and putting them on the defensive. I assume you are just 13 or so and do not realize this.

Here is a detailed, intelligent review of the show (free registration required). I don't think that's what you REALLY want, and you won't actually read it, but it explains in depth many of the aspects of the show that engaged me.

SA review in NY Times

sleepyguy: Yes, it is good news indeed that Gerard seemed to nail the role. That was the only role in which I had trouble imagining someone else.

I also think that, although the show has some juicy leads, it is still truly an ensmble piece, and I don't think a crappy Moritz or Melchior would completely ruin it.

I think the show itself is very strong on its own. The staging,lighting, and, yes, even the controversial "choreography" are all quite unusual and serve to create a whole that, in my opinion, rises above its parts. I thought it was quite brilliant, the way the spare, severe, very Brechtian plot, dialog, and mood (basically preserving the original text)had a very colorful and stirring rock score and sensibility layered on it. And it didn't seem like it was designed by comittee...someone had a crazy vision and followed through with it, love it or hate it. It sort of creates a world and an atmosphere/mood that really hadn't been seen on stage before in exactly the same way. I am a crabby 46-year-old guy with a pretty good theatre background who didn't go up to Broadway much anymore because nothing seemed really worth the trip and expense any more...but this show thoroughly engaged this old cynic.