The Pirate Queen in NYC, compared to Chicago! **SPOILERS!!**- Page 2

[queenbee2]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 10:08am

msls777, thanks for a well thought out post regarding these various scores. I agree with a lot of your points, and while I wish (as stated in previous posts) that there were more big endings to some of the numbers (thus encouraging the audience to get more actively involved in the production), I have fallen in love with many tunes from PQ.

After seeing the show for the first time in Chicago, I fell in love with "I'll Be There" and "Here on This Night". I thought the duets between Grace and Queen Elizabeth were stunning. "I Dismiss You" was one of the more powerful scenes I'd seen/heard in a musical in some time. "If I Said I Loved You" is a beautiful tune, and "Father Stand By His Son" is haunting/creepy and powerful. And now that the show has moved to NYC, "Woman" is a gripping power ballad that will be sung in concerts and auditions for years. And besides all those great tunes, I can't get Boys'll Be Boys out of my head- as much as I wish I could!

Yes, Pirate Queen forces the audience to do a bit more work than one might have to in Mama Mia or Hairspray or Drowsy Chaperone. But if you actually take the time to listen to the score, I think it is one of Claude Michel's best.

But that's just me.

-QB

[Muhlethaler]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 10:10am

Updated On: 8/31/11 at 10:10 AM

[TechEverlasting]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 10:20am

I don't think the Elizabeth we see in "Pirate Queen" works either as an accurate historical figure or as a characterization revised to suit a musical interpretation.

Queen Elizabeth's character has been fleshed out a great deal since Chicago, but I still don't understand why she agrees to a prisoner swap with Tiernan or why she makes so many concessions to Grania at the end. I don't get what's going on between her and Bingham either. Is Elizabeth just teasing him, or does she actually see him as a potential suitor?

In the source novel Elizabeth didn't want Grania killed because she was still upset about what had happened to Mary Queen of Scots. I think this concept would have gone a long way to making the Elizabeth of Pirate Queen an understandable character.

I love the analogy about a future musical featuring a peace loving George W Bush. I hope they don't make him sing in a high operatic voice.

[Anakela]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 10:34am

"Terra Marique Potens" is the ship's motto if you will (I can't think of the correct term). Can not for the life of me remeber what it meant...I suck. But it was an insult to the Queen esentially. I believe it was something like "power on land and on the sea".

It's the O'Malley family motto/family crest. :)

Thanks for the comparison- I kinda like what I saw in NY more, now that I know what was cut from Chicago- I'm totally going again after it's out of previews.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 1:43pm

"Instead of 'All Aboard the Coel Na Mara' we have "The Pirate Queen". Same song melodically. But not a lyric is the same! All the ensemble sings this, instead of just the male pirates. It is much stronger now! The name of the ship is now 'The Pirate Queen', not the Coel Na mara."

Hmmmm...The problem I had with the opening number was that the lyrics didn't match the melody at all. It ends up sounding like a pub drinking song and they should be swinging metal mugs back and forth a la Beauty and the Beast.

"The first battle. The battle scenes are COMPLETELY different, and for the better. I never wanted to admit it, but in Chicago the battles were pretty laughable. NOW they are VERY good, very realistic, and very tight."

If they cut the toy boat and the flailing arms, then the show is already vastly improved.

"'boys'll be Boys' different lyrics again, I really shouldn't even bother saying that anymore, it's ALL different!"

Yikes! It was the melody that was truly awful. I hope they've got a trunk song somewhere with which to replace it. Worst song in the show.

But overall, it does sound like the show has improved. I wish them all the best of luck.

[rbxprs]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 2:06pm

Maybe it was just my interpretation, but the reasoning i found behind Elizabeth taking Teirnan for Grace was because Grace's child was motherless. Elizabeth, at that time, not having any children, but wishing she had some, softened her heart for the child's sake. The reasoning i found behind her giving into Grace's request at the end was because Bingham, who she put in charge had disrespected Ireland and Elizabeth felt bad because she was the direct cause, she put him there. She didn't entirely lose though. Elizabeth wanted Ireland for her empire, and she got it. Ireland had to pay taxes and such, but as long as there wasn't any uprising or problems, she had no reason to be a ruthless dictator to them.

[WordedGrace]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 4:22pm

I have to agree with the postings about the character of Queen Elizabeth and her portrayal in this musical. While some writers take liberties to enhance a storyline I didn't see a clear motivation for any of Elizabeth's actions. Her actions could not have based on being motherless when she made the choice to remain a virgin..whether by will or unwillingness to share the crown it's a fact. So, the idea that she would feel sorry for someone based off a child makes no sense to me. I did enjoy moments of the show but I just found Queen Elizabeth's motivations just a frenchman's take on a very popular Monarch that started Britian on it's path to greatness. I think if her character was more true to what we've read about her and this so called relationship with Bingham had some ounce of truth it would work for me. But, again...We'll see with the learned critics have to say when it opens.

[courtnyj]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 4:39pm

I totally agree. Elizabeth's actions never made sense. Her motivations were poorly explained at best. What makes even less sense is Grace's decision to plead with the Queen to ease up on the Irish at the end. She spends most of the show cursing the English and swearing to fight to the death to keep Ireland free and then she suddenly accepts England's occupation as long as they treat her people fairly? What? Her change of heart isn't explained. Updated On: 3/13/07 at 04:39 PM

[Popular]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 4:46pm

WordedGrace - She was called the virgin queen because she never MARRIED. I could be wrong but I think the questions of whether or not she had lovers is still being debated.

On another note, one of the recent press rehearsal videos had B&S expressing that they are NOT adaptors, they use whatever is documented as RESEARCHERS and take what they feel is most useful to tell the story. They said that even with Les Mis they took liberties and that was from their own country's history.

Maybe someone could ask Linda at the stage door what she feels the Queen is letting Grace go for. I would LOVE to know her take on it!

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 5:52pm

B&S expressing that they are NOT adaptors, they use whatever is documented as RESEARCHERS and take what they feel is most useful to tell the story.

Huh? That makes no sense. I assume something is lost in the translation.

Steph, I didn't think it was possible, but you make the show sound even MORE ridiculous and the characters even MORE one dimensional than they were in Chicago. I am sure that was not your intention, but your description of the Father being much more strict and the bit about QE1 using the possibility of having a child to motivate her court are just silly.

[Popular]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 5:56pm

I believe they were asked if they based the show on a book and their answer was that when they create a show they don't consider themselves adapters. They read the books on the subject as researchers and then take what they need to move their story forward. I'm sorry if I didn't explain that well. I posted it merely because there was discussion on what kind of liberties they take with the original history/text.
Updated On: 3/13/07 at 05:56 PM

[WordedGrace]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 6:12pm

Popular... It's a well known fact that she chose to remain a virgin..and vowed to never take a husband...so that being said, it's one in the same.. You can do research on it, most scholars believe she was virgin for fear of pregnancy, disease, unfavor within the realm, or scarring from smallpox. If you still need proof.. Look it up on wikipedia.org

P.S. Popular...so because I'm unmarried can I call myself a virgin too???

Updated On: 3/13/07 at 06:12 PM

[Popular]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 6:23pm

I agree. It seems that it would make most sense if she were. But then I read things like this (source in link below):

"Although it has been said that Queen Elizabeth had lots of different lovers, in fact she only ever had one love-affair. This was with Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, who she may well have married had the political circumstances been more favourable to the match. Stories of relationships with men like Christopher Hatton, Water Raleigh, and The Earl of Essex, are false."

I'm sure I could probably find several other websites that state something different, which is why I said earlier that this topic seems as if it's still being debated. Once again, I'm not arguing, just pointing out that it may not be as black and white.

To be honest I'm not so sure why it would make that much of a difference to the play. If you look at little girls they have a strong instinct to mother (playing with dolls, ect...) long before they become someone's lover. I think I'm starting to lose track of what it is we're discussing here LOL
Myths about QE I

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 6:29pm

So if they do not consider this an "adaptation" why do the credits read "Based upon the novel, 'Grania - She King of the Irish Seas' by Morgan Llywelyn"?

Perhaps you are not explaining what they meant, but as you say it it makes absolutely no sense. Is this a way to brush off the criticism that the "book was better"?

[Popular]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 7:04pm

Sueleen - I'm not going to pretend to know what they meant by it or put words in their mouth that they didn't speak. Watch the video where they said that and come up with your own conclusion. I *THINK* it was the last Broadway Beat video.

Is this a way to brush off the criticism that the "book was better"?

Of course not. I have not offered an opinion on which is better. To be honest, I haven't read the novel and I haven't seen the NY version (which is still in progress). I think that's the point they were making though, don't expect the novel. Think of the novels as a palette of colors and the stage is the canvas... yes they are using the novel but what they paint with it may be an entirely different picture depending on the story they want to tell. That's MY take on it anyway - it may not be what THEY meant.
Updated On: 3/13/07 at 07:04 PM

[StephanietheStar]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 8:45pm

I'm sorry if I'm making the characters seem MORE one dimensional...I don't believe that is how they are at all in the newer version,and it is truely my horrible attempt to explain the show that is making them sound that way.


For one, we see more of the characters Dudhdara and Elizabeth, as well as Donal so we get more background and in addition more of a dimension to those characters.

There's a reason why I'm not a writer :)