McAnuff did a revival not too long ago up north at his Stratford Festival that was basically the same show as '93, but the production values were updated with a little assist from more current technology. If he took an "ain't broke, don't fix it, just tweak it" approach to that, in spite of his statements, I can't imagine this will be much different, which is a shame. I'd like to see more of a reinvention.
Among other things I'd like to see changed, I don't like some of the choices he and Pete Townshend made with the book. I kind of think they were trying to cut the cloth to fit then-current fashion, and it could be more daring today. (After reading his autobiography, Who I Am, this made more sense; Pete seems to have developed the musical at a time in the early Nineties when he was in a very rough head space and really not prepared to be giving such a project the level of thought it deserves.)
For one thing, I hate that there's a stage direction where Tommy hugs Uncle Ernie and forgives the character, and even in 1993 I don't see how the hell people accepted that.
More than that, nearly the entire storyline turned from traumatic (but formative) experiences into a ****tease of same. Everything is blunted or toned down except for the abuse at his cousin's and uncle's hands.
Like, at least in the movie, for example, the Acid Queen (or the Gypsy, as the stage show called her; I'm almost positive they'll go back to Acid Queen now that the term Gypsy is verboten unless it's a revival of, well, Gypsy) actually does something to him. In the musical, it's all "Look what I'll do to him" and then, after Captain Walker went to the trouble of letting her pimp take him (and his disabled kid!) to see her, he decides at the last second "you know what, letting a hooker give my son drugs and do God knows what else is not a great idea." So, unlike Tina Turner's fantastic performance in the movie which conveys the same horror from Tommy actually having gone through something, it's a wet dish-rag of a scene.
And more than that, the ending... in addition to Tommy arbitrarily forgiving everybody... they changed the whole point of the story and not for the better. On the original album and in the film, the message was that superstardom ain't what it's cracked up to be. JCS, which followed, was very much influenced by "Messiah Tommy" and his fall from ego and hubris. You lose that when you decide to have him say "...excuse me? No, I didn't intend to be a star, you made me that way, I want to be like you." If that was true, a significant chunk of the second act would never have occurred or it might have been indicated in any way before Sally asked her "question."
Bottom line: after reading Ken Russell's screenplay (not hard to find these days), my immediate impression was "...you know, if you take out all the typically Ken Russell pseudo-O'Horgan imagery, this is a solid book for a musical. Why did they change it?" I actually wish the show had just tightened up the movie's plot a bit more.
Getting away from the book, which I'm (to say the least) not a fan of, the music had a similarly blunted impact. The orchestrations of this show took all the bite out of the music; The Who performing the score live was when its sound really thrived, or, say, Tina Turner's performance of "Acid Queen" in the movie where the band totally rocks the joint with an extended jam section (not heard on the soundtrack). The rock elements of the show, which work the best elsewhere, were not well served on Broadway.
My two cents, ultimately? I think, for Tommy to fully reach the potential of the material, the show would have to be re-worked from scratch. And I'm not confident Des would do that.
Formerly gvendo2005
Broadway Legend
joined: 5/1/05
Blocked: After Eight, suestorm, david_fick, emlodik, lovebwy, Dave28282, joevitus, BorisTomashevsky, Seb28