#1
Posted: 6/10/11 at 12:38pm
Saw the show on Tuesday and really enjoyed it, but had some difficulty hearing some of the score. Any news on a recording?
Tales of the City Cast Recording?
#2
Posted: 6/10/11 at 1:00pm
Unless the show makes it to Broadway, don't expect a cast recording.
There are great quality audio recordings of the show circulating. Seek one out -- you'll be able to at least listen to the entire show again and catch what you missed, etc.
There are great quality audio recordings of the show circulating. Seek one out -- you'll be able to at least listen to the entire show again and catch what you missed, etc.
#3
Posted: 6/10/11 at 1:41pm
abtract19, I'm assuming that you saw the Tuseday, June 7th show then. They did a talkback with the artistic director and some of the actors right after the show.
The subject of a cast recording was brought up a couple of times. The artistic director (can't remember her name right now, sorry), said that they would love to do a cast album, and mentioned one will probably eventually come out, but not for this production. She mentioned a couple of times that this production was entirely produced by them (ACT), and thusly I'm assuming that any cast album from this production would also lie on their shoulders, and they couldn't do that.
Also, she mentioned that even though the show is now more or less "frozen" for the San Francisco outing, that the creative team is still looking at the show and seeing what further tweaks can be made (as with every out of town preview). She made some cryptic comment that there may be a future production somewhere else, but I'm not sure.
I am hoping for a cast album also, at least with these main principal cast members (I hope most, if not all of them will get to continue with the show in the future). I thought Judy Kaye, Mary Birdsong, and Wesley Taylor were all fabulous in their roles.
The subject of a cast recording was brought up a couple of times. The artistic director (can't remember her name right now, sorry), said that they would love to do a cast album, and mentioned one will probably eventually come out, but not for this production. She mentioned a couple of times that this production was entirely produced by them (ACT), and thusly I'm assuming that any cast album from this production would also lie on their shoulders, and they couldn't do that.
Also, she mentioned that even though the show is now more or less "frozen" for the San Francisco outing, that the creative team is still looking at the show and seeing what further tweaks can be made (as with every out of town preview). She made some cryptic comment that there may be a future production somewhere else, but I'm not sure.
I am hoping for a cast album also, at least with these main principal cast members (I hope most, if not all of them will get to continue with the show in the future). I thought Judy Kaye, Mary Birdsong, and Wesley Taylor were all fabulous in their roles.
Xanadu! Can't cry on cue!
#4
Posted: 6/10/11 at 3:36pm
Thanks for the info. I forgot there was a talk back that night.
#5
Posted: 6/10/11 at 7:05pm
Ye, I can't picture getting one for at least a year, much as I'd love one. I suspect, depending on other commitments, any future production of this show (at least done in North America) would have largely the same cast--most of them have been with it fthrough several workshops now, and the cast has gotten some of the show's best reviews (deservedly).
There are live recordings of course floating around I guess, as well as the demo which is about five years old now, all sung by Jake Shears and fascinating but doesn't really reflect the score as I saw it on stage.
There are live recordings of course floating around I guess, as well as the demo which is about five years old now, all sung by Jake Shears and fascinating but doesn't really reflect the score as I saw it on stage.
#6
Posted: 7/15/11 at 3:25pm
There was a new article posted on Playbill.com where the Artistic Director of A.C.T. mentions that there may a cast recording of this production (when if you checked my earlier post, she said that there probably won't be one for this production).
I'm hoping that this may come to pass, as I think the current San Fancisco cast is pretty strong. And if they don't plan on bringing this show to Broadway anytime soon (which it currently doesn't look like it), a cast album now may be a good idea to drum up some interest.
I'm thinking that it probably will come down to whoever can pony up the money, wheather it be Jake Shears on the Scissor Sissors end, or if those extensions that the A.C.T are doing will bring in enough money to justify doing it.
edit: the link doesn't seem to want to show up, but here it is: http://www.playbill.com/news/article/152753-Scissor-Sisters-Scored-Tales-of-the-City-May-Get-Cast-Album
I'm hoping that this may come to pass, as I think the current San Fancisco cast is pretty strong. And if they don't plan on bringing this show to Broadway anytime soon (which it currently doesn't look like it), a cast album now may be a good idea to drum up some interest.
I'm thinking that it probably will come down to whoever can pony up the money, wheather it be Jake Shears on the Scissor Sissors end, or if those extensions that the A.C.T are doing will bring in enough money to justify doing it.
edit: the link doesn't seem to want to show up, but here it is: http://www.playbill.com/news/article/152753-Scissor-Sisters-Scored-Tales-of-the-City-May-Get-Cast-Album
Xanadu! Can't cry on cue!
Updated On: 7/15/11 at 03:25 PM
#7
Posted: 7/15/11 at 4:00pm
where did you guys find the live recording? i couldnt find it. i've seen the show and loved it. but i wanna hear it again. pleeeese... thanks :)
#8
Posted: 7/15/11 at 5:49pm
Like everything else about this show, the score seems to really be dividing people (I know some have even called it untheatrical hard rock, which makes me wonder what show they saw, another poster on a forum I won't name said, when I said how much I enjoyed the score, that I was a "dizzy young fag" who wouldn't know the first thing about musical theatre, which I thought was a brilliant argument on his part for what he disliked about the music so much lol)--but I think it's pretty terrific, and even some of the ballads that sounded samey to me in the theatre, have really grown on me with repeated listenings.
I hope they manage a recording, as stated it seems one of the best chances to give the show more of a life, and honestly the score and the cast, who I can't see vocally being bettered, were the best things about the production. It does make me wonder, though, where they'd get the funds from. Scissor Sisters have done fairly well, but Jake isn't rock star rich really. Maupin must be pretty well off, and is a huge fan of the project, but could he fund it? ATC are not for profit, and I doubt have any money for such an undertaking...
Maila, send me a PM :)
I hope they manage a recording, as stated it seems one of the best chances to give the show more of a life, and honestly the score and the cast, who I can't see vocally being bettered, were the best things about the production. It does make me wonder, though, where they'd get the funds from. Scissor Sisters have done fairly well, but Jake isn't rock star rich really. Maupin must be pretty well off, and is a huge fan of the project, but could he fund it? ATC are not for profit, and I doubt have any money for such an undertaking...
Maila, send me a PM :)
Updated On: 7/15/11 at 05:49 PM
#9
Posted: 7/15/11 at 7:50pm
I don't know if one would enjoy the score more if you already were a Scissor Sister's fan (or at least heard some of their music first).
I have been a big fan of theirs ever since the second go around of their "Laura" single, and I was immediately hooked by the music in the show (starting with that disco dance song). A lot of the score really does sound like something that would fit right at home on a SS album. I like how they pay homage to the disco era without it becoming too pastiche, except when they wanted it to be.
Though when I went to see the show, I did sit in front of a woman in her late 50's or early 60's (I'm guessing) and a friend of hers who was around the same age. The one lady, while discussing the show to her friend during intermission, seemed to love everything about the production (costumes, lighting, acting, even the sets! ("I know!")) but said the music was bland, and the lyrics were unmemorable and stupid. They have never heard of the Scissor Sisters before.
Also, was I imagining things, or did I see a sign when I saw the show back in early June that there was to be a souvenir program that was to be available later in the month? Did I imagine things, or is there now now programme (except for that "Words On Plays" thing), as I didn't see one on the online web store.
I have been a big fan of theirs ever since the second go around of their "Laura" single, and I was immediately hooked by the music in the show (starting with that disco dance song). A lot of the score really does sound like something that would fit right at home on a SS album. I like how they pay homage to the disco era without it becoming too pastiche, except when they wanted it to be.
Though when I went to see the show, I did sit in front of a woman in her late 50's or early 60's (I'm guessing) and a friend of hers who was around the same age. The one lady, while discussing the show to her friend during intermission, seemed to love everything about the production (costumes, lighting, acting, even the sets! ("I know!")) but said the music was bland, and the lyrics were unmemorable and stupid. They have never heard of the Scissor Sisters before.
Also, was I imagining things, or did I see a sign when I saw the show back in early June that there was to be a souvenir program that was to be available later in the month? Did I imagine things, or is there now now programme (except for that "Words On Plays" thing), as I didn't see one on the online web store.
Xanadu! Can't cry on cue!
#10
Posted: 7/15/11 at 8:10pm
I was just going to ask about a souvenir program as well - I'd love one if there is one, but I've seen no evidence, though I swear someone else mentioned that they saw something about one coming out. Also does the standard program now have a song list, and if so could someone type it out? (I went to the third preview). The Words on Plays thing is really well put together, but of course has no photos of the show.
I admit, I am a big Scissor Sisters fan. That said, I tend to prefer their more electronic/dance stuff (Sex and Violence and Invisible Light are my two faves from their last album), and this show doesn't remotely reflect that, or at least not closely. I actually know some SS fans who have found the score way too Broadway, so maybe they're kinda damned if they do, damned if they don't.
What impressed me about the score is you can tell it is still Jake Shears writing, if you know his stuff, but I personally think he changed his style enough to suit the show. If you compare the score as it is in the show to the 2007 demo, there's been a strong development. The demo kinda worried me, it doesn't sound particularly theatrical, and many of the songs, as good as they are don't seem remotely connected to story or character.
Luckily they dropped and replaced more than half of the songs from the demo, and I was surprised at how strong many of the lyrics are (obviously many disagree with me on this - ie the "6 plots in need of a librettist" thread on here--but maybe I am just a dizzy young fag who knows nothing about theatre lyrics :P ). I think, unlike some pop composers doing musicals, Shears has managed to create a score that works as a musical theatre score should - mostly anyway. (There's one disco number on the demo, Don't You Break My Boogie Tonight which takes place at the underwear dance contest which I wish they would have kept--it works both as a disco song and a character song and I prefer it to what replaced it).
That said, in the reviews, the score seems to have divided critics as well. I know some hated that for Mouse's letter they used the original, non-rhyming, letter from the books, but I thought it worked. Anyway...
I admit, I am a big Scissor Sisters fan. That said, I tend to prefer their more electronic/dance stuff (Sex and Violence and Invisible Light are my two faves from their last album), and this show doesn't remotely reflect that, or at least not closely. I actually know some SS fans who have found the score way too Broadway, so maybe they're kinda damned if they do, damned if they don't.
What impressed me about the score is you can tell it is still Jake Shears writing, if you know his stuff, but I personally think he changed his style enough to suit the show. If you compare the score as it is in the show to the 2007 demo, there's been a strong development. The demo kinda worried me, it doesn't sound particularly theatrical, and many of the songs, as good as they are don't seem remotely connected to story or character.
Luckily they dropped and replaced more than half of the songs from the demo, and I was surprised at how strong many of the lyrics are (obviously many disagree with me on this - ie the "6 plots in need of a librettist" thread on here--but maybe I am just a dizzy young fag who knows nothing about theatre lyrics :P ). I think, unlike some pop composers doing musicals, Shears has managed to create a score that works as a musical theatre score should - mostly anyway. (There's one disco number on the demo, Don't You Break My Boogie Tonight which takes place at the underwear dance contest which I wish they would have kept--it works both as a disco song and a character song and I prefer it to what replaced it).
That said, in the reviews, the score seems to have divided critics as well. I know some hated that for Mouse's letter they used the original, non-rhyming, letter from the books, but I thought it worked. Anyway...
Updated On: 7/15/11 at 08:10 PM
#11
Posted: 7/15/11 at 8:57pm
Eric,
I'm not sure how current this is but you can find a song list on the www.act-sf.org site.
Click on the TOTC link.
Click on the Press tab.
Click on Press Kit.
Click on the Song List pdf file.
As I said, I'm not sure if this is from previews or after opening.
I'm not sure how current this is but you can find a song list on the www.act-sf.org site.
Click on the TOTC link.
Click on the Press tab.
Click on Press Kit.
Click on the Song List pdf file.
As I said, I'm not sure if this is from previews or after opening.
#12
Posted: 7/15/11 at 10:25pm
I'm too am hoping this show gets recorded (especially with this cast), and has a long life outside of San Fran. When I'm home alone, my favorite pastime is to pretend I'm Mona Ramsey, and an audio would REALLY help me out!
Slotted spoons don't hold much soup
Updated On: 7/15/11 at 10:25 PM
#13
Posted: 7/15/11 at 10:47pm
Maila, I got your PM but your settings say you can't accept PMs, so I can't send anything back...
#14
Posted: 7/16/11 at 12:49am
Nikki, thanks for that - I would have never thought to look. That seems to jive with the recording I have, except for Dear Mama reprise in Act II.
#15
Posted: 7/16/11 at 2:51am
For anyone who doesn't want to go searching for the song list:
http://www.act-sf.org/site/DocServer/TALES_SongList.pdf
I found this by myself a couple of weeks ago, and it is really hard to find on their web page.
http://www.act-sf.org/site/DocServer/TALES_SongList.pdf
I found this by myself a couple of weeks ago, and it is really hard to find on their web page.
Xanadu! Can't cry on cue!
#16
Posted: 7/16/11 at 9:16am
I gotta admit, I'm kinda torn on this one. Im a huge fan of the books, and anything that's gonna get them a second life is fine by me. But...
(You knew it was coming, right?)
... this just aint it, sorry. The books are so engrained in the 70s/80s San Francisco experience, and the score just feels like a '10s refraction of that, almost imposing a style on it that it doesnt want nor need. The letter song didnt bother me so much, but the rest? Meh... which is kinda how I felt about the show overall. I wasnt impressed with much of it, save the costuming, which seemed about the only thing that was true to the spirit of the Tales. The rest was simply too much of a "re-imagining" that took a few too many liberties with the characters.
And I *really* hated the set.
Of course I'm biased. I lived in SF when the Tales were published, and Maupin had all sorts of Easter eggs written into the columns for the benefit of those of us intimately familiar with what he was, on occasion, *really* writing about. He took those out when the compilations were published, but they were the sort of thing that coloured our first-date experience with this bunch. I guess it's one of those times when, indeed, you really did have to be there...
I dont know that a truly successful musical based on Tales is possible. Everything is so episodic that about the only thing that might work is more in the style of YAGMCB: vignettes with character-driven songs. This was a noble try, but just not quite there.
(You knew it was coming, right?)
... this just aint it, sorry. The books are so engrained in the 70s/80s San Francisco experience, and the score just feels like a '10s refraction of that, almost imposing a style on it that it doesnt want nor need. The letter song didnt bother me so much, but the rest? Meh... which is kinda how I felt about the show overall. I wasnt impressed with much of it, save the costuming, which seemed about the only thing that was true to the spirit of the Tales. The rest was simply too much of a "re-imagining" that took a few too many liberties with the characters.
And I *really* hated the set.
Of course I'm biased. I lived in SF when the Tales were published, and Maupin had all sorts of Easter eggs written into the columns for the benefit of those of us intimately familiar with what he was, on occasion, *really* writing about.
He took those out when the compilations were published, but they were the sort of thing that coloured our first-date experience with this bunch. I guess it's one of those times when, indeed, you really did have to be there... I dont know that a truly successful musical based on Tales is possible. Everything is so episodic that about the only thing that might work is more in the style of YAGMCB: vignettes with character-driven songs. This was a noble try, but just not quite there.
http://docandraider.com
#17
Posted: 7/16/11 at 11:50am
I was rather mixed about the score and the book, but I would still love a cast album to preserve the show.
#18
Posted: 7/16/11 at 6:27pm
I actually thought the book did a fine job of delineating character and giving the many plot lines a good shake. When they all assembled to sing "Maryanne" I realized, I know these people. Not cause I know the original materials, but because the show had told me who these people were to the extent that I actually cared about them. Though there were problems, the book really did impress me. The songs (besides Love Comes Running, Dear Mama and to a lesser extent Paper Faces) didn't do much for me. I didn't expect a lot from the lyrics, but I would have at least liked some melody.
#19
Posted: 7/16/11 at 7:42pm
I think the book did the best it could. I do think they did a good job of very quickly letting you know what the characters were about, no mean feat considering. This does mean you lose some (or a lot) of nuance, but that's comparing a long serial to a condensed piece, aside from maybe just focusing on two stories, there's not much else that could be done--and most fans would be pretty upset if Tales had been reduced to just two stories. To be honest, the appeal of the series are the characters, not the outrageousness (which for a while started to go IMHO a bit too far)--I'm glad they didn't try to musicalize the cannibal cult of the second book), and if it was just reduced to one or two stories it wouldn't hold up much in print either.
But I suppose this does give the piece a bit more of the sitcom feel some mention, even if I give Jeff W props for managing to somehow make the characterization and basic plot so clear. I've noticed that most people who have complained that the plot is so condensed, anyone who didn't read the novels wouldn't follow it, are people who HAVE read the novels and disliked the show. For the most part, the people I know (like the guys I saw it with) who hadn't read the novels or seen the series said they found it easy to follow and understand. Of course people who do know the story can fill in a lot of details... That said, I'm not sure I'd agree that characters were re-imagined, at least not from how they behave in the first book, although they were simplified.
(Apparently a movie was almost made in the early 80s--with a lot of changes that ended up causing it not tobe made, but I would be curious to read the script, as awful as I'm sure it would be).
I actually find the score greatly melodic, though I suppose that term is very relative, and I admit it's helped that I've heard it so many times. Maybe anything is melodic after 9 listens *shrug*
Sean I think your opinion is fair, and I appreciate reading it. I agree that it may be an impossible piece to musicalize and really fully make work, even if I liked it a lot more than you. It's funny how many different opinions there are on it--I have an older friend who hated the costumes and thought they were a few years out of date at least.
I didn't mind the set--I think it needed more stuff to fill the sides of the stage, but I thought it did at the least a good job of making it clear what setting you were in--with so many quick scene changes, that's pretty important. But I know a LOT of people *hated* it.
It seems the attempt to do a score that sounded 70s without sounding 70s (if that makes sense) was conscious, and to be fair, that definition fits the Scissor Sisters music (whether they're channeling Moroder and BeeGees in their dance stuff, or 70s Elton John in their slower and honky tonk stuff) to a T, so that may be something Jake Shears can't get away from no matter what he's working on.
I do find it interesting when people comment that to really get or appreciate the books it's probably something you had to live through. Or been there. I'm sure to get them on one level, that's true, but I think it's been proven by now that the San Fran 70s in jokes, etc, aren't their main appeal. I know some who have disliked the musical (and by no means do I mean you) have said both that it's a show that since they live in San Francisco completely misses the feel and experience of San Francisco, yet they also say the only reason audiences seem to be loving it is because they are all from San Francisco and any other city would be utterly confused and unamused. Since I've been in the Bay Area all of a total of 10 days of my life on two trips, and wasn't born till 1980, I don't really get how such blanket statements can be true.
But I suppose this does give the piece a bit more of the sitcom feel some mention, even if I give Jeff W props for managing to somehow make the characterization and basic plot so clear. I've noticed that most people who have complained that the plot is so condensed, anyone who didn't read the novels wouldn't follow it, are people who HAVE read the novels and disliked the show. For the most part, the people I know (like the guys I saw it with) who hadn't read the novels or seen the series said they found it easy to follow and understand. Of course people who do know the story can fill in a lot of details... That said, I'm not sure I'd agree that characters were re-imagined, at least not from how they behave in the first book, although they were simplified.
(Apparently a movie was almost made in the early 80s--with a lot of changes that ended up causing it not tobe made, but I would be curious to read the script, as awful as I'm sure it would be).
I actually find the score greatly melodic, though I suppose that term is very relative, and I admit it's helped that I've heard it so many times. Maybe anything is melodic after 9 listens *shrug*
Sean I think your opinion is fair, and I appreciate reading it. I agree that it may be an impossible piece to musicalize and really fully make work, even if I liked it a lot more than you. It's funny how many different opinions there are on it--I have an older friend who hated the costumes and thought they were a few years out of date at least.
I didn't mind the set--I think it needed more stuff to fill the sides of the stage, but I thought it did at the least a good job of making it clear what setting you were in--with so many quick scene changes, that's pretty important. But I know a LOT of people *hated* it.
It seems the attempt to do a score that sounded 70s without sounding 70s (if that makes sense) was conscious, and to be fair, that definition fits the Scissor Sisters music (whether they're channeling Moroder and BeeGees in their dance stuff, or 70s Elton John in their slower and honky tonk stuff) to a T, so that may be something Jake Shears can't get away from no matter what he's working on.
I do find it interesting when people comment that to really get or appreciate the books it's probably something you had to live through. Or been there. I'm sure to get them on one level, that's true, but I think it's been proven by now that the San Fran 70s in jokes, etc, aren't their main appeal. I know some who have disliked the musical (and by no means do I mean you) have said both that it's a show that since they live in San Francisco completely misses the feel and experience of San Francisco, yet they also say the only reason audiences seem to be loving it is because they are all from San Francisco and any other city would be utterly confused and unamused. Since I've been in the Bay Area all of a total of 10 days of my life on two trips, and wasn't born till 1980, I don't really get how such blanket statements can be true.
Updated On: 7/16/11 at 07:42 PM
#20
Posted: 7/16/11 at 11:18pm
I dont think it's so much SF in-jokes as it was in-jokes Maupin wrote strictly for his audience, as though he was pushing how far he could do in parodying actual SF folk and still get away with it. For instance, there's a character who appears in the second (maybe third) novel, a society reporter who identifies herself as a "simple girl from Grassland". Everyone in SF knew *exactly* who he was talking about, including the target herself.
I've not seen the script for the 80s movie, but I've heard from friends who claimed to have read it that it was a pretty botched job. I trust their word on that. But I think it's a pity that Channel 4 couldnt do the rest of the books.
One of the great ironies of the Tales saga, of course, is that when Maupin finished the sixth book, he swore that was the last time he was writing about these characters. A few failed non-Tales novels later, he came back to them for two more. Type casting, I suppose, if such a thing exists in the writing world, but hey, he could do worse.
I've not seen the script for the 80s movie, but I've heard from friends who claimed to have read it that it was a pretty botched job. I trust their word on that. But I think it's a pity that Channel 4 couldnt do the rest of the books.
One of the great ironies of the Tales saga, of course, is that when Maupin finished the sixth book, he swore that was the last time he was writing about these characters. A few failed non-Tales novels later, he came back to them for two more. Type casting, I suppose, if such a thing exists in the writing world, but hey, he could do worse.
http://docandraider.com
#21
Posted: 7/17/11 at 12:16am
've read, I think in a post here, that the columns actually deviated a lot from the novels early on--there was a Tinker Bell Kserial killer who left his victims with glitter (slightly parodying the Zodiak killer) which was replaced by the Norman plot, a running joke about Connie dieing every so often and coming back to life, and other elements that I assume were changed when people proved to be more into the characters, and connecting with them, than outrageous story points (I still say the cannibal rose cult, or whatever, in More was a bit much, not cuz it was disgusting but it struck me at the time as stupid).
Right, I heard about the society reporter, and how apparently she saw it, much to Maupin's surprise, as hugely complementary. There's also stuff like the Rock hudson gay allusion, which now wouldn't have to be as hidden, etc.
All I've heard about the 80s movie is they wanted to make John, the gay gynecologist, a serial rapist (female rapist, to be clear). It's funny cuz around the same time the soap opera Santa Barbara got into a lot of trouble for revealing a serial rapist was the same gynecologist who was examining his victims after, saying it would just make many viewers less likely to trust their doctors after an attack.
Wasn't the Night Listener a minor success? I've only seen the movie, which I remember nothing about except, despite having Toni Colette, it wasn't great. I have read that both his novels have cameos from the Tales cast, but I haven't bothered (like most of his readers, it sounds like). When he wrote Michael Tolliver Lives, the first of his Tales books I was old enough to read as it came out, he claimed up and down it wasn't technically a Tales novel (wha?!! I guess cuz it was from one POV), but he's since been happy to place it as part of the canon. To be honest, I don't think he's a great, or even very good writer. I do think he's a great storyteller (some lapses aside), so unlike, say, Hollinghurst (perhaps not someone it's fair to compare anyone to), I wouldn't pick up anything with his name on it because I know how absorbing the prose is. So maybe that's part of the reason people stick to Tales.
And yeah, the series lost a lot of its style and enjoyment when Channel 4 and PBS didn't follow through. More was OK but not nearly tot he level, and Further (which had a bunch of new plots to bring back faves not in the novel) was, from what I remember, pretty dismal, as much as I hate to say that about anything with Laura Linney in it... (Well I'm on the fence with The Big C).
Right, I heard about the society reporter, and how apparently she saw it, much to Maupin's surprise, as hugely complementary. There's also stuff like the Rock hudson gay allusion, which now wouldn't have to be as hidden, etc.
All I've heard about the 80s movie is they wanted to make John, the gay gynecologist, a serial rapist (female rapist, to be clear). It's funny cuz around the same time the soap opera Santa Barbara got into a lot of trouble for revealing a serial rapist was the same gynecologist who was examining his victims after, saying it would just make many viewers less likely to trust their doctors after an attack.
Wasn't the Night Listener a minor success? I've only seen the movie, which I remember nothing about except, despite having Toni Colette, it wasn't great. I have read that both his novels have cameos from the Tales cast, but I haven't bothered (like most of his readers, it sounds like). When he wrote Michael Tolliver Lives, the first of his Tales books I was old enough to read as it came out, he claimed up and down it wasn't technically a Tales novel (wha?!! I guess cuz it was from one POV), but he's since been happy to place it as part of the canon. To be honest, I don't think he's a great, or even very good writer. I do think he's a great storyteller (some lapses aside), so unlike, say, Hollinghurst (perhaps not someone it's fair to compare anyone to), I wouldn't pick up anything with his name on it because I know how absorbing the prose is. So maybe that's part of the reason people stick to Tales.
And yeah, the series lost a lot of its style and enjoyment when Channel 4 and PBS didn't follow through. More was OK but not nearly tot he level, and Further (which had a bunch of new plots to bring back faves not in the novel) was, from what I remember, pretty dismal, as much as I hate to say that about anything with Laura Linney in it... (Well I'm on the fence with The Big C).
#22
Posted: 7/17/11 at 12:28am
He's definitely more a storyteller than a writer. The early works were great fun as daily serials, and the fact that he had to cram so much into a limited word count made them much tighter. But with both MICHAEL TOLLIVER LIVES and MARYANNE IN AUGUST (as well, arguably, as the last two serialized novels), he was becoming more stylist than writer. Frankly, I didnt think much of MARYANNE IN AUGUST: it felt even more forced than MTL. Part of that, I suppose, was because the earlier books were almost Dickensian with their lavish casts and meandering storylines, but these last two were sort of caught in the limbo of being original works that still had to hew to the now-accepted Tales format.
I dont know that I'd call NIGHT LISTENER a minor success, if even that much. The film sank like a stone, and it's the only Maupin book I've never finished. Others may disagree, but I found it a real stretch.
I dont know that I'd call NIGHT LISTENER a minor success, if even that much. The film sank like a stone, and it's the only Maupin book I've never finished. Others may disagree, but I found it a real stretch.
http://docandraider.com
#23
Posted: 7/17/11 at 1:22am
The last of the six novels wasn't serialized either, was it? But that makes sense that he'd work better under the Dickensian serialization structure. That's actually why I think even a vignette YAGMCB style for the show wouldn't work.
(I actually haven't read Maryanne yet--though I have it sitting in my bookshelf).
Well I just know that I remember Night Listener getting a lot of press (partly due to the real life circumstances it was based on), and I thought if it got enough attention for a movie deal it must have done well enough, but those are all assumptions. You're right, the movie barely lasted a week here.
(I actually haven't read Maryanne yet--though I have it sitting in my bookshelf).
Well I just know that I remember Night Listener getting a lot of press (partly due to the real life circumstances it was based on), and I thought if it got enough attention for a movie deal it must have done well enough, but those are all assumptions. You're right, the movie barely lasted a week here.
#24
Posted: 7/17/11 at 1:22am
The last of the six novels wasn't serialized either, was it? But that makes sense that he'd work better under the Dickensian serialization structure. That's actually why I think even a vignette YAGMCB style for the show wouldn't work.
(I actually haven't read Maryanne yet--though I have it sitting in my bookshelf).
Well I just know that I remember Night Listener getting a lot of press (partly due to the real life circumstances it was based on), and I thought if it got enough attention for a movie deal it must have done well enough, but those are all assumptions. You're right, the movie barely lasted a week here.
(I actually haven't read Maryanne yet--though I have it sitting in my bookshelf).
Well I just know that I remember Night Listener getting a lot of press (partly due to the real life circumstances it was based on), and I thought if it got enough attention for a movie deal it must have done well enough, but those are all assumptions. You're right, the movie barely lasted a week here.
#25
Posted: 7/17/11 at 1:30pm
You're right: Book 6 wasnt serialized. The Chronicle didnt make a good enough offer, as I remember.
I'll be curious to see what you think of MARYANNE. Not to ruin it, but he took one serious wrong turn with her back in the original canon, and this feels like an appeasement to fans who've never forgiven him for it. People have said that he lay the groundwork for that as well as MARYANNE somewhere back in Book 2, but I've never been able to find it.
I'll be curious to see what you think of MARYANNE. Not to ruin it, but he took one serious wrong turn with her back in the original canon, and this feels like an appeasement to fans who've never forgiven him for it. People have said that he lay the groundwork for that as well as MARYANNE somewhere back in Book 2, but I've never been able to find it.
http://docandraider.com
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95