THE DROWSY CHAPERONE- Page 2

[Jinks]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 11:13am

A review, (especially a critical one) should have enough detail to show that the reviewer actually went to see it. The review in question doesn't. I'm just looking for some idea of whether I should see this show or not. Reading that was a waste of my time.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 11:18am

Well for what it's worth, I know some crazy old show queens who's favorite musicals are (truly) things like VIA GALLACTICA, and PLATINUM which were not only terrible shows but also had terrible scores - but these guys listen to their "private" recordings of them like they were MY FAIR LADY.

I haven't seen CHAPERONE live, so I can't comment whether the show-within-a-show works or is entertaining enough for the overall concept of the musical, but it's not far fetched to me that the man in the char would be in love with a truly terrible unmemorable (to most) musical.

P.S The only reviews I think are unworthy of time and attention are poorly written reviews. Hunter's review is certainly not that, and I think he backs up his opinions pretty clearly in his subsequent posts. To even throw out there that somebody "didn't see the show and has written a review just to be negative is to not want to hear any type of disenting opinion on what you feel or think the show to be. IMO, of course.
Updated On: 4/6/06 at 11:18 AM

[best12bars]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 11:23am

Well... While I admit that TheEnchantedHunter is focusing completely on the score and nothing else, and reviewing it entirely out of context (he makes no mention of how these songs serve or don't serve the show's concept), I wouldn't necessarily go so far as to say he didn't see it.

You're right that he doesn't back his criticism up as well as Munk did. But I also feel that Munk missed the entire point and the premise of the show, as well.

We all have "guilty pleasure" shows that we love, when most of the population at large either despises or has forgotten over the years. Or has never even heard of. THIS is what Man In Chair is showing us: His guilty pleasure show. Even people who aren't into musicals can identify with something in their life that they love, when no one else around them seems to understand why.

I'm actually surprised that Munk and Enchanted didn't "get" that, or understand the attraction this holds.

[uncageg]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 11:27am

Producerboy22.....Caroline or Change was also an original musical.

I plan to see Drowsey in June. Am looking forward to it.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 11:28am

See, Best12, I completely get that concept on paper, but that doesn't mean I will love the execution...

The one thing that scares me about all these comments is sort of the ongoing argument that people should love the show (especially show fans) simply BECAUSE of the concept. It scares me because that doesn't bode well for audiences completely unfamiliar with this kind of "fixation" that admittedly most of us on this board can relate to on one level or another. If the show doesn't make a strong enough case WHY somebody would love a show that is terrible or forgotten, than it won't find long term audiences outside of the musical theatre community.
Updated On: 4/6/06 at 11:28 AM

[steveshack]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 11:31am

I think the problem is that when a new show comes in, especially to Broadway, and it gets praised so highly, people come in with specific expectations. One of them is that they're going to get the second coming of Sondheim or, in this case, a cross between Irving Berlin and Oscar Wilde. So, if what they hear doesn't reach that kind of goal, then they are disappointed.

This show is a comedy first and foremost. Even the most negative reviews have given Bob Martin and the book its due on that level. I found this show to be side-splittingly hilarious and I like the fact that the score is intentionally a send-up where it sometimes spirals out of control wanting to be more than it is. That's what made it so funny. If this were a straight parody, then this score might not work, because the show within the show is intentionally terrible. "Man In Chair" even suggests we skip parts of it -- AND WE DO!

So, it's not like we're sitting there being subjected to a subpar musical. Rather, the genius of the book is that we are transported into the world in and behind the "musical" that's onstage. The point of the show is the book. I know that goes against the grain of people who think a musical should only be about the score, but this is a show about the book -- and about this lead character in particular. We see the show through HIS eyes. We dissolve into tears at the end because he has taken us step by step into his sad, little world and he shows us why this show (and why, by extension, all musicals) mean so much to those who love them.

Seriously, the show would not work if the score didn't have intentionally bad moment. That's the whole point. And I don't think it's a "dodge." I also have admit that I actually liked a lot of the score. It perfectly fulfilled the function it was given. And there are some stand-out hilarious moments, especially for true theatre queens who've had to sit through shows like the show-within-a-show without the delicious asides from a "Man In Chair."

I think the show succeeds on all levels and I cannot wait to see it again.

[Ourtime992]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 11:33am

TheEnchantedHunter usually rips shows I love to pieces. It's nice to see him doing it to someone else's show for a change! His usual vitriolic tone notwithstanding, I think his review is valid. I'm glad so many of you appreciate The Drowsy Chaperon, but its validating to me as a reader that it isn't hitting everyone the same. If anything it makes me more excited to see it because it makes it feel like less of a theatre queen bandwagon.

[steveshack]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 11:34am

>I'm glad so many of you appreciate The Drowsy Chaperon, but its validating to me as a reader that it isn't hitting everyone the same. If anything it makes me more excited to see it because it makes it feel like less of a theatre queen bandwagon.

The hallmark of a really great show is that people love it and hate it with passion.

[LeaGirl]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 11:37am

While I enjoyed Drowsy (though I found it to be very overhyped) I don't get why people are attacking him for not enjoying it. He didn't say "you are stupid if you like it" - and I for one enjoy seeing both sides of the opinion - if I like a show, I find it interesting to read posts from people who didn't. If I hate a show, I find it interesting to read posts from people who like it.

Just because one person found something "boring" or "trite" and YOU didn't doesn't mean it is a personal attack on YOU. Some people seem to think that their personal taste is being attacked when somebody doesn't like something that they do. Grow up.

I personally found Wedding Singer much funnier. The many posts on this board discussing how much Wedding Singer sucks are not making me uncomfortable. It's my damn guilty pleasure (oh so guilty, I feel like I need a disguise to go buy tickets), and somebody elses opinion isn't going to make me feel like a lesser person for liking something they consider "lowbrow" or whatever.

Maybe it's age coming out in these threads - I know I for one was a lot more insecure about having my opinions backed up when I was a teenager. Now I don't give a crap if you like it or not, though I am interested in reading what you have to say. People get their panties in a twist SO EASILY on here!

[TheEnchantedHunter]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 11:40am

Jinks and Best12Bars, I didn't focus on the "details" of the show because I think there are larger and more pressing issues of concept and execution that are problematic with this show (see below). Also, I am not a professional critic, just a musical theatre lover with an informed point-of-view, and am not obligated to fulfill the standards of journalistic criticism.

>>>We all have "guilty pleasure" shows that we love, when most of the population at large either despises or has forgotten over the years. Or has never even heard of. THIS is what Man In Chair is showing us: His guilty pleasure show. Even people who aren't into musicals can identify with something in their life that they love, when no one else around them seems to understand why<<<

Sure, but the built-in problem is that TDC never succeeds in proving WHY it should be the audience's guilty pleasure as well.
The fact is, there are pleasures to be had in the show, thanks mainly to the cast, and it has something to say. But, unlike URINETOWN (another show that employs musical comedy tropes to comment on contemporary mores), I don't think it's been said very well and remain unconvinced.


Melinda Tentrees
Brighton, England




Updated On: 4/6/06 at 11:40 AM

[Unknown User]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 11:48am

I'm just going to ask it.

Are the different alias' supposed to be witty?

Because, if that's your attempt. I'd think of something else.

[YankeeGal#24]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 12:13pm

Saw it on Tuesday night, and had lots of laughs. What I loved about Drowsy:

Bob Martin (hope he is nominated for a Tony for his role.)
Sutton Foster's singing/dancing
"Adolpho" (at first)
Laughing at the corniness of it all

What I didn't love:
Georgia Engel
The songs
Jennifer Smith seemed miscast in her role
The whole "Trix" piece didn't seem to fit
The repetiveness of the humor--okay, it was funny the first and maybe second times, but after that it gets a bit old

As I reflect back now, I wish this were a one man show, with Bob Martin as that man. Watching him elevated the book and the entire show.

I want to add that I am a HUGE Beth Leavel fan but was disappointed here. Her character was funny, again, at first, but frankly after awhile I got....drowsy.

[best12bars]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 12:32pm

There is another difference of perception that I'm reading here...

"Drowsy" is a MUSICAL within a one-man PLAY. The only musical numbers in it are the songs (and score) that spring from Man In Chair's scratchy recording.

The music and the show-within-a-show are not a parody, spoof or send-up of '20s musicals. They spring (larger than life) from Man In Chair's imagination of what this musical must have been like in its day. Remember, he's never seen it. He wouldn't be old enough to have seen a show in the '20s. So, he has "overdone" these visuals in his mind through repeated OBCR listenings (and probably based on a few "rare photos" of the show he may have collected)... and that's what the audience is seeing here. We're looking into his imagination. "Drowsy Chaperone" is not a parody or a Carol Burnett sketch... but a "musical fantasy" generated from the "non-musical" main character's mind.

Updated On: 4/6/06 at 12:32 PM

[TheEnchantedHunter]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 12:54pm

>>We're looking into his imagination. "Drowsy Chaperone" is not a parody or a Carol Burnet sketch... but a "musical fantasy" generated from the "non-musical" main character's mind.<<

You can justify it all you like but no matter how you slice it, it's still pastiche---and a poor excuse for one at that.

Bretaigne Windust
New York, NY

Updated On: 4/6/06 at 12:54 PM

[Unknown User]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 12:55pm

A) I am not associated with the show at all
B) I loved it and can't wait to see it again
C) No matter what you think of the material (it's too this and not enough that...) if it's makes for a thoroughly enjoyable and satifying evening's entertainment, there's nothing wrong with that!
D) I loved it and can't wait to see it again
E) Lather, Rinse and Repeat

[NYLG]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 1:41pm

Good friends of mine went to DROWSY last night...they are a typical upper middle class couple who see about ten shows/plays per year. They had a wonderful time...couldn't say enough good things about the show. They told me that they hadn't left a theatre feeling so elated in ages. Their comments and enthusiasm made me realize that I can't remember the last time I was able to sit through ANY show without dissecting it...an activity which has been facilitated by this and other theatre message boards. Whatever happened to going to the theatre to simply have an enjoyable evening out?

We can analyze DROWSY ad nauseam...THIS is what we do. BUT...it probably won't make a difference with respect to the show's success...or as some of you believe...it's failure. In the end, however, DROWSY won't live or die because of the "intellectual" banter among theatre snobs...there aren't enough of us to fill the seats in that barn called the Marquis. Actually, the size of the Marquis may just be the biggest obstacle that DROWSY will have to overcome. DROWSY seems to have a general appeal...much like THE PRODUCERS or WICKED. Need I say more? I fully believe that most of the general NY population, as well as most tourists, will love this show...that and the general buzz will keep it going for a decent run.

[TheEnchantedHunter]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 2:02pm

>>We can analyze DROWSY ad nauseam...THIS is what we do. BUT...it probably won't make a difference with respect to the show's success...or as some of you believe...it's failure. In the end, however, DROWSY won't live or die because of the "intellectual" banter among theatre snobs...there aren't enough of us to fill the Marquis...<<<

So what? The point is not the commercial success or failure of any given show (it couldn't matter less to me) but the opportunity for individuals to exercise their critical faculties and engage in healthy debate and argument, such as whether a show fulfills its premise or not. It's an end unto itself and one of the reasons boards like this one were created.


Allison MacKenzie
Peyton Place, New Hampshire


Updated On: 4/6/06 at 02:02 PM

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 2:45pm

I'm going to try to see it this weekend. I'm surprised it's splitting audiences so much.

Honestly, I say we get off Drowsy Chaperone's back and organize a mob to burn Bernie Taupin at the stake.


-still convulsing in utter horror over the awfulness... the awfulness...

How can you possibly be so concerned about Drowsy Chaperone or Wedding Singer or Tarzan when the actors in LESTAT have to spout those lyrics night after night?!

[Unknown User]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 2:47pm

You can justify it all you like but no matter how you slice it, it's still pastiche---and a poor excuse for one at that.

Hey, Ella Enchanted. Why don't you stop stating your opinion as fact. It's one thing to review a show and quite another to review a show and then degrade someone for liking it.

And, enough with the various names at the end of your posts. We get it. You think you're funny. No one else thinks so.

Must we continue the charade?

[shesamarshmallow]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 2:55pm

I think the only thing that bothered me about the inital review was "THE BLOWSY FLOPEROO" in the title, which seems to be there only to be hurtful and present the OP in opposition to the DC lovers on the board. It seems belligerent.

[TheEnchantedHunter]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 4:33pm

No, not belligerent, shesamarshmallow, just representative of my love of word-play (I'm here for my own edification, not to yank chains). But as a result of your post, I'll emend it, if the system permits.


Carrie Pipperidge
The New England Coast

[Bruce Memblagh!]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 4:43pm

"just representative of my love of word-play"

Maybe you do have a love of word play, but I assume you'll improve with practice. But feel free to "e"mend away!

[Unknown User]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 4:49pm

"Dear Diary,

Today I used a bunch of really big words, mainly so I can see them in print...my how clever I am...I am, right...RIGHT??"


PS: Roninjoe and Find Your Grail = FUNNY!

[TheEnchantedHunter]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 6:51pm

Emend: to improve by critical editing

from American Heritage Dictionary

They have one in every library, singingbackup, you should check it out. That way you needn't be defensive about your vocabulary or envious of another's.


Tootie 'The Most Horrible' Smith
St. Louis, MO
Updated On: 4/6/06 at 06:51 PM

[shesamarshmallow]

Posted: 4/6/06 at 6:58pm

Emend is a much less common word than amend, which has a similar meaning, and therefore can easily be mistaken as... a mistake.

Anyway, thanks for editing the title to match the intent of the post.