Spring Awakening Review - Nov 29 preview

[jewelchk]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 8:30am

I was hoping to catch Spring Awakening off-Broadway but I didn't get a chance to, so I was happy to hear about the transfer because I got a chance to see it. I'm also a fan of Duncan Sheik and more acoustic/string-heavy rock.

This show is enjoyable, but it does have a lot of problems that I think may be partially because it's a smaller show in a large space. I liked it, didn't love it, but I'm unsure if it's going to be able to find a big enough audience to make it. I have no doubt it will have a very dedicated following of those who do love it, I just don't know if that group will be big enough to keep it open without rave reviews from the critics. And since that's pretty much in line with a lot of the opinions I've been reading, I'll actually move on to specifics.

The good:

The score is gorgeous! The music to this is beautiful, and I'm still trying to decide if it is strong enough to carry the show through its problems. Lea Michele sounds wonderful and is captivating every time she sings this music. I think the general opinion that her performance has been "iffy" in the transfer comes from the fact that she's so great to watch when she sings, but her acting was far less impressive. She took my breath away in her opening number, and then underwhelmed me until her next song.

Jonathan Groff seemed a little iffy in act one, but in act two he came to life and his singing and acting were spot on. That's about the time I started getting engrossed in the characters as well. The adults were well done. Jonathan Wright is very good, very funny and interesting in his delivery. The cast as a whole is really good, especially considering how young everyone is.

The audience I saw the show with was very mixed in terms of how old people were, and the reception seemed surprisingly good across the board. People cheered and many stood at the end of the show. There were two elderly ladies sitting in front of me who I thought would have been cringing, but they were laughing near the end of the show. It may have been in a, "oh, youth" kind of eye-rolley way or out of enjoyment, I'm not sure, but either way it was a positive reaction. This show is very different from most of the work on Broadway right now, in a smaller, grittier less commercial riskier NY theater kind of way (which is very good!), but I wasn't sure how that would be received if people weren't fairly sure of what they were getting into when they got tickets.

The-- stuff I liked less:

The space may be too big for the show. I feel like there was stage movement added in to try to keep the stage occupied and the characters involved with the audience. A lot of the songs had uninvolved characters randomly walk across the stage. The show works best when the action is centralized or the characters are sitting near the end of the stage, and I think some of the personalities are getting lost in the big space between the stage, the ceiling, and the rear mezz (I was in the rear orchestra).

The score is so great, but the lyrics and book were a lot less great. I felt like the dialogue was going in and out of archaic sentence structure, and it didn't work well for me. I wanted either the whole play to be in older vernacular or to be in modern language (even with the late 1890s fashions and set up, I think all modern language still would have worked better than the mix), but it going back and forth depending on the character was eh for me. I'm also not sure the transitions between songs and unsung plot were great in a lot of places.

I never thought I'd prefer obvious head mics a la Rent and Brooklyn, but I think they would be much better in this show. The sound mixing was okay considering all the different mics they use, though some of the lyrics were a little muddled. From what I've read, it seems the sound aspect has much improved.

Sorry, I know a lot of people like him and some have been saying Tony-nom, but John Gallagher Jr.'s character bugged the heck out of me. I wasn't sympathetic to him because his character was so frenetic. Of course the idea of his story line was affecting, but I didn't feel like I connected to his character at all and that he was the weak link of the main cast. But he is definitely working his butt off, and maybe he just had an off night, so I'm glad other people are more appreciative of his performance than I was.

The stuff I didn't like at all:

The choreography actually made me laugh inappropriately. Dancing isn't central to this show by any means, but the bits of choreography that were in there I really didn't enjoy at all. I think maybe they were going for a very raw, confused, even trance-like state at points, but I did not think this worked at all. Every time there was an ensemble dancing number, I cringed inwardly.

The worst moment of the show for me was the second half of Totally F*****. Some may think singing "blah blah blah" over and over is edgy, I thought it was lazy. A part where everyone lines up and does the one thematic dance looked so sloppy and spastic rather than free and young. None of it worked for me at all.


So, in summary, I wanted to like this show more than I did, but I'd still recommend it for the score and for people who like different theater that isn't a BROADWAY SPECTACLE and may require an open mind. I wouldn't recommend this show for anyone easily offended or who loves only traditional musical theater.

Also, I now want Lea Michele to record an entire album of Duncan Sheik's music. That would be so great.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 8:42am

Great review. Agreed. You are not alone.

[bwayondabrain]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 8:44am

That was a really good review- I really liked how you separated it into the whole "good, not so good, and bad" sections :)
I'm seeing this show in less than a month, so I'll be sure to give my opinion on it.
I'm not as excited to see it anymore after all the things I've heard about it, but my friend wants to take me, so I'll go along!

[Lauren_T]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 9:45am

I just don't get it why people are not feeling this show. I think it soo soo amazing. And I'm not just saying that like some little 14 year-old girl who is in love with WICKED. I am a 20 year-old who just know when it is good theatre. SA is fresh, new, and raw. People need to be a little more open to new things and just stop looking for every fault in the show and just enjoy it. Maybe cuz I saw it off-Broadway and got the real experience. Not sure. But the show is so great and deserves a long long run.

And bwayondabrain, Be excited again! There is a lot to look forward to.

And it kinda depresses me that people are all looking forward to "Legally Blonde" Heard some of the music and it highly resembles "The Wedding Singer" who's music is awful! Oh geeze

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 9:50am

"The choreography actually made me laugh inappropriately. "


That made me laugh out loud! Anyway great review.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 11:26am

Lauren_T - I went in expecting to love it like everyone else. I wasn't looking for faults. That said, I didn't hate it. I just didn't love it.

[LimelightMike]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 11:31am

I love how despite the bag of mixed nuts these reviews seem to have garnered, SPRING AWAKENING will (ultimately) find moderate success ... I hope so, anyway. I do, however, also feel that it will struggle finding a real demographic. Older theatre patrons won't really 'feel it' as us young people do -- That's just my opinion. I mean, I've never known any 40, 50-somethings to learn and grow with a Duncan Sheik album playing in the background, you know? Maybe, yes, we can all relate to SOME themes, but I feel that *some* topics discussed/played-out throughout the show are a bit mm...'too much' for some particular audiences? Again, I'm just voicing my own opinion here, and I do welcome feedback.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 11:41am

There is no doubt in my mind that SA will get raves and go on to be at least a Best Musical nominee.

I'm hoping for it, in fact.

[LimelightMike]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 11:58am

We can only hope and pray for the best!

Thanks for continued support with anything and everything SPRING AWAKENING. I can assure you that it is and forever shall be forever appreciated!

Best,
- Mike

[educator06]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 11:58am

Remember people 50 and over were around during Woodstock, Jimi Hendrix, the 60's. Not exactly a tame period. I think a heck of allot of them will appreciate and truly enjoy SA as I did. We may be older but were still cool... LOL

[carymetorent2]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 12:53pm

Great review.

I saw it last week and it was completely not what I was expecting.
From all that I had heard of Lea Michele, I was expecting to dislike her, but she surprised me in a good way.
Her voice is gorgeous - pure and angelic. Although her acting is a bit off at times, she is a 20 year old pretending to be 14 and I did get a sense of youth from her, so for me, she achieved that. She has been with this show since she was 14, so it's interesting that she had to change her way of going about the show as she gets older and strays farther from the age of Wendla.

The second act was infinitely stronger to me. The score is fabulous and strong throughout (although I did not enjoy some of the lyrics in "The Word of Your Body") and I cannot wait to hear the cast recording.

I saw Lauren Pritchard's understudy who was good. Personally, I loved Otto. He didn't do much, but the little bit he sang stuck with me - all the boys have fabulous voices.

I thought the sex scene was done fabulously. It is interesting to me because I was with two adults (harsh critics and big theatregoers) and my friend and they all were raving about it by the end of the first act, where as I was a little less enthusiastic. I definitely enjoyed the second act a lot better. Perhaps because it had more substance.

The guy who played Moritz was a little disjointed for me. I thought many of the boys were more stand-outs for me. He did have some great songs though. "Don't Do Sadness" is sung beautifully by him.

I found the first act to have moments of tedious dialogue and unnecessary moments. I hope that it will be tweaked a little bit. I definitely did come out of the show liking it. I think it just needs a little work.

[shiksa_goddess]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 12:55pm

I strongly agree with you about the music being absolutely gorgeous, but the lyrics being really substandard. I feel that in a lot of places the lyrics really cheat the "integrity" of the show. "Blah blah blah blah" is obviously the most glaring example of this. Not to mention "wanna bundle up into some big-ass lie."

The handmics are very distracting when they are pulled out in the middle of a scene. I think it breaks the tension of the scene, be it sexual, comedic, emotional, etc. I would have preferred to see headmics.

Gotta disagree about John Gallagher Jr. though. He has such raw energy and he is really a standout in the cast, I couldn't take my eyes off of him when he was on stage. IMO he outshone Lea and Jonathan (both of whom I enjoyed.)

Updated On: 12/1/06 at 12:55 PM

[McFrenzied]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 5:08pm

Nice review, Jewel. Thanks.

You guys don't see the brilliance of the "blah blah blahs"?? I don't think it was lazy at all...I thought it was very well thought out, actually, and exactly what the moment needed at the time. The whole moment is about giving up and no longer fighting the system (this is a set up in direct contrast to the end, where Melchoir has become more of a man and refuses to be passive). There is nothing more that can be said, so why bother saying anything at all? We've all been in arguments before where everything after a while is just meaningless. It's exactly the surprise the song needs to build into that amazing "I don't care anymore" frenzy.

If this were made into a movie, I would imagine that in the moments where songs are sung, we suddenly see the kids in 2006 street clothes. I strongly believe that the songs jump us out of time. Since you can't do that on the stage, pulling microphones out is one symbolic way of creating that frission. It's a stylistic choice, and it didn't bother me. The only time the mikes pulled me out of the moment was in the beginning of Act II, for "Our Bodies Are Guilty", because it felt like that beautiful song could exist in the 1890's world.

I personally think the larger house has helped this show (I saw it Off as well). Yes, the songs don't shake down the building as much as it did when it was in a smaller space, but I think the cast sounds better than they did Off Broadway. The music is richer, without being blasting, and the lighting is gorgeous..some moments feel so much bigger, more haunting. To me, it IS a spectacle..and not the kind that relies on big sets and machinery..the earned kind, where images stay with you forever.

[gumbo2]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 5:22pm

For me, I went in really wanting to love it and I had loved the little clips I had seen online and such. I definitely did ike the show, but I feel like it had so many flaws that could be taken care of that would make it so much better. Oh, and I personally loved John Gallagher. He formed a definite character and stuck with it and grew throughout the show.

Anyway, I like reading your thoughts on the show, it's very interesting how people can have such different opinions on what they thought worked/didn't.

[Phantom2]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 10:48pm

educator06- For a 50 year old woman (as you like to mention in all of your posts), this show has really got your panties on fire!

Updated On: 12/1/06 at 10:48 PM

[jewelchk]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 11:26pm

Thanks guys, I'm glad you like the review, the comments are encouraging :)

Yankeefan007, I totally agree with you, and I hope Spring Awakening gets at least a Best Score nomination if not the win. Although I think that may depend on if Mary Poppins is elligible and how Pirate Queen is by the time it gets to Broadway.

shiksa_goddess and gumbo, I've since seen the clips of John Gallagher on the website, and he came across a lot better. I still have to agree with cary, that his take of Moritz was too disjointed for me, but it also looks like he was having an off night on Wednesday.

educator, that is a good point about older generations! It will be interesting to see the box office reactions when the real reviews come out.

McFrenzied, I understood why the writers chose to go with the blah blahs, but since I didn't like the whole sequence, I thought a couple measures would have been sufficient to make the point. I feel like they missed an opportunity to do something more meaningful with a racy, attention-grabbing song. That is an interesting point you make about the microphones, though, using them as a transitionary move into present-day music. They just seemed kind of clumsy at times and a bit of a distraction to the actors, which was the main problem I had with them. I agree with you that the show sounded great... did you think the presence of the characters got dwarfed by the size difference of the theaters?

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 11:39pm

"Although I think that may depend on if Mary Poppins is elligible and how Pirate Queen is by the time it gets to Broadway. "

I'm pretty sure Marry Poppins is elgible.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 11:41pm

Of course MARY POPPINS is eligible.

As much as it would be nice for SPRING AWAKENING to get rave reviews (though I didn't love the show personally) I can't see that happening. It's just not wonderful enough.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 11:54pm

And educator, thanks for pointing out that we 50 yr olds started the sexual revolution.

[McFrenzied]

Posted: 12/1/06 at 11:58pm

Oh, Munkus, there you go being a moody patootie again. How can you call "Legally Blonde" the death of Broadway and then NOT support a show like SA which is all about innovation on Broadway?

Jewel, did the character's presence get dwarfed? I think that depends on where you're sitting. I was in the front mezzanine...sure, it wasn't like the Atlantic where you were right next to them, but I could still see facial expressions clearly, the story was still as powerful--I cried at the funeral and the end of the play--I was really overcome. I was amazed that the play has expanded in size and scope to accomodate the space, and it's become grander and more operatic because of it.

The next time I go, I want to get the on stage seating to get a REAL intimate feel.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 12/2/06 at 12:38am

McFrenzied, It would be to your advantage to actually know what you are talking about before you run your mouth.

1. I am not moody. I said that I did not love the show, implying that I liked it.

2. I didn't call LEGALLY BLONDE the death of Broadway. I know nothing about it. I said that that song was dreadful - that's it.

3. I absolutely do support SPRING AWAKENING. Had you actually read my review on SPRING AWAKENING, you would know that I quite liked the show, I just didn't think it was great. It didn't work for me on many levels, all of which were outlined in my kind, thoughtful review. I urged others to go see the show, and form their own opinion. And I said the score was brilliant.

What about that isn't supportive?

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 12/2/06 at 12:41am

what did u say?
I was looking at Yul's chest.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 12/2/06 at 12:49am

About what?

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 12/2/06 at 1:01am

Do you think he shaved it?
I do believe you said 80% of Broadway is crap.
If i believed that I would leave the city and work in a regional.
But I have learned to read between yer lines.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 12/2/06 at 1:24am

Well, 80% is a bit dramatic.

I would say that 70% of new musicals are disappointing.