The Progression of the Broadway Musical

[shira467]

Posted: 9/5/04 at 5:45am

Reading posts the past few days has made me wonder, "Where is the Broadway musical heading?"

I know very little about Broadway in comparison to many people, like Margo Channing, so allow me to try an express myself.

For me, musicals as I know them started around Rodgers and Hammerstein. So we have "Oklahoma", which consists of beautiful songs. Later on, there is Comden and Green, "Singing In The Rain". The Broadway musicals were the popular music, unlike today.

Skipping ahead, we have "Funny Girl", "Les Miserables", "Phantom of the Opera", and so many others.

Today, our original musicals seem to be taking their cues from pop music, like "Wicked" and "Rent", and appealing to younger audiences. There is also the emergence of the "off-broadway avant garde" musical, like "Urinetown" and "Avenue Q", which are original, yet seem to scare the living daylights out of some people who were raised with Rodgers and Hammerstein, and the like. "I hear they actually pee at the audience."

So what's next? A rap musical? Hip-hop? An endless amount of musicals with no original scores, a story strung along to previously existing works, like "Mamma Mia"? Or musicals based on movies, such as "Hairspray" and "The Producers"? Or more revivals and imports?

Note that I am leaving Sondheim out of this, purposely, because he has spanned many decades, composing original music not derived from whatever the popular music was at the time. Or so it seems.

Any ideas?

[FranklinShepard-Inc.]

Posted: 9/5/04 at 7:17am

I think, the main question is, whether the broadway musical is still willing to be musical theatre, that is to say whether a story behind it, being a book or a concept. It is strinkingly remarkable that all those new shows that happen to be revues of former pop singers, totally lack something recalling a book. One could quite as well call it a concert with songs of this artist(s). The main reason why they call it musical is merely that it sells better. I do think that these Mamma Mia lookalike shows are but a trend. First the famous pop singers are at some time of a limited number. The problem though is whether there will be enough talented writers and songwriters to return to musical theatre. Yes there are J.R.Brown, LaChiusa, Lippa, Guettel, Tresori and Flaherty/Ahrens (who I like the best from this list). Yes there are many old pros (e.g.: Yeston, Menken, Coleman, Herman, Kander/Ebb, Sondheim, Strouse). But the latter ones won't be there forever and the former ones can't hold up to the standards yet. Well the only hope may be to wait for one Broadway-Messiah. I am heading to become that one May take a couple of years still though.

[shira467]

Posted: 9/5/04 at 2:24pm

Best of luck to you!

[Derek2]

Posted: 9/5/04 at 2:28pm

I was thinking, a show set in the 60's, with cool costumes and sets (like How To Succeed) would do well featuring all the great american standards. Songs like Smile, Down With Love, New York New York....idk, I always thought with an original idea and those great songs people might actually like it.

Posted: 9/5/04 at 2:47pm

I think someone needs to right MUSICAL THEATER MUSIC for a CONTEMPORARY show. Honestly, look at Broadway. Almost all of the shows are set in the past. The only one I can think of in the present is Avenue Q (Rent is set in the 90s). They say that people are too scared to set a musical in the present times because it might take an audience out of the show... Like 'It's set today? But we don't burst into song today! What are they talking about?' or whatever. And anything that's remotely close isn't musical theater MUSIC. Eh? Anyone agree? I wish I could write music, because I would right it in an instant (selling it would be another thing, but whatev)

[BWayBoy88]

Posted: 9/5/04 at 2:49pm

I think one reason shows arent set in the present day is because they might become dated.

Posted: 9/5/04 at 2:52pm

Couldn't they be set in the present without references to celebrities or headlines?

And Rent was contemporary until we moved past the end of the millennium. It's still a beloved musical.

[shira467]

Posted: 9/5/04 at 2:54pm

That's one of my main concerns with "Avenue Q". We love it because we get the references. But in a few years or so, "Who's Gary Coleman"? So they'll constantly have to update a bit here and there.

Posted: 9/5/04 at 2:57pm

They do still explain who Gary Coleman is a bit (I'm Gary Coleman from TV's Diff'rent Strokes/I made a lot of money that got stolen by my folks etc). What I still want to know is what they're gonna do with the Bush line in 'For Now' if/when Bush loses. I know there was a thread on this earlier, but I'm just saying...

[shira467]

Posted: 9/5/04 at 3:00pm

I think you can easily change "Bush" to "insert annoying republican name, problem, etc..." here.

But Gary Coleman....I've never seen Diff'rent Strokes. I barely know who he is, because I've seen snippets here and there. The next generation has no clue who he is, unless they randomly watch the E! True Hollywood Story

[GovernorSlaton]

Posted: 9/5/04 at 3:20pm

The producers, of course, want the "Bush" line to be a problem in November, and if it needs to be changed, I'm sure they'll come up with something.

Posted: 9/5/04 at 3:35pm

For awhile I bet there'll just be CELEBRATION. And they have until January to change it.