The future of the jukebox musical

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 1:25pm

I was doing some thinking as of late on this subject with recent developments. This hasn't been a great year for the genre. Between the shutout of the Tonys, the horror of Good Vibrations, the tiny run of Lennon, the closing of Movin Out, and the wailing attendance of All Shook Up, the only one I saw and was able to see good things in, it's making me think about plans for the future with this genre. Everyone has been trying to copy the success of Mamma Mia, with no success. Do you guys think the downturn the genre has taken this year will have an effect on future ones? Or at least curb them? I know Jersey Boys is coming next year, and I know others have been in the works, do you think people will wait to see how these do before rushing to write the next one? Will they look to recent flops like Good Vibrations and Lennon and consider the financial loss they can take or will they still look to Mamma Mia and the grand success they can have?

[WonderBoy]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 1:28pm

I think general consensus is that revues do very well but jukebox musicals do not. I have no problem with a well constructed jukebox musical but I think the key is finding the story and then adding the music in not vice versa.

[lildogs]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 1:38pm

Since MM recently crossed the ONE BILLION DOLLAR mark, I think producers will still try cause the potential profit is as high as the risk--who would've guessed an ABBA musical would do so well?

[Pippin]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 1:42pm

exactly, wonderboy. I am going to see ASU in about a week, partly because of everyone's approval of it on this board.
musicals are never just about the music, and I think people (producers) forget that. if you do not have a strong story with enticing characters, then the songs that they sing are meaningless and will fall of deaf ears (and uncaring wallets)

I want to play devil's advocate for one moment though. I was thinking about this yesterday. with everyone's dissaproval of the jukebox musical genre (of which I am indifferent, I don't normally see them, but at the same time, I do not boycott them), isn't "side by side by sondheim" technically a jukebox musical, if we take the definition that it is existing songs of which are arranged to make a new dramatic through line? if people are so against this genre, then why is it different for these shows.
please feel free to discuss.

[lildogs]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 1:47pm

No, Side by Side is a revue--the difference being (to me) a revue presents the songs of a certain artist in a loose concert form--Smokey Joe's Cafe, Putting It Together, even Fosse. The jukebox musical takes an artist's catalog of music and fashions a plot around the songs, like All Shook Up or Mamma Mia!

[Pippin]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 1:53pm

but smokey joes and fosse has no thru line. it is just a collection of songs. side by side and putting it together have a through line and a dramatic arch.

sorry, arc.

Updated On: 9/16/05 at 01:53 PM

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 1:58pm

I would also add that jukebox musicals are primarily based on pop songs (of a chosen composer, performer or era), not intentionally theatrical material, unlike "Side By Side By Sondheim," "A Grand Night for Singing" or "Starting Here, Starting Now." Those I would classify as theatrical reviews of aldready theatrical material.

The edges blur a bit with a show like "Ain't Misbehavin'," which most would consider a review (including me), but it has at least an emotional through-line, and the Fats Waller songs were not written for the stage.

I don't think there is a black-and-white answer. It depends on a lot of things.

[lildogs]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:00pm

There is a loose string perhaps in Putting It Together, but the plot of Side by Side is just narration about Sondheim...also none of Sondheim's songs have ever been in a jukebox.

Have you seen Fosse, Smokey, Side, and Putting?

[Pippin]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:02pm

I agree, b12bars, but just on the letter of the law definition of a jukebox show- taking already exisiting songs and putting them into a show, wouldn't putting it together fall in a jukebox category.

not saying that if it had that label, PIT would be a bad show. on the contrary, I love it and all of Sondheim. once again, just being devils advocate.

[Pippin]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:06pm

yes, dogs, I have seen all but side by side live.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:09pm

Pippin - good work. I like how everyone comes to the defense of Sondheim, but could care less about the bashing of ASU or Lennon. I think people will start to look at the recent disappointments as a guideline. I think ASU actually was a pretty well crafted jukebox musical. And considering Elvis is the number 2 best selling artist of all time, you'd think it would sell quiet well. Maybe they should make jukebox musicals from obscure musicians, that didn't have huge success, but are still well known. I'll guess we'll see how Jersey Boys holds on. And the new "ring of fire." Which got pretty good reviews.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:14pm

Side By Side, Ain't Misbehavin, Fosse etc... are all REVUES. Even if there's a bit of a through line and narration, they're still revues.

A jukebox musical has a true plot with a beginning middle and end (usually a bad plot, but a plot nonetheless) and has actual characters to tell the story. Anything that takes an existing catalogue of popular songs which were not written to be part of a story, to advance plot or to inform character and crams those songs into a story, creating a book musical is a jukebox musical.

Movin Out is a modern dance ballet (and a terrific one) which tells a story through dance with the songs commenting on the action (not always directly). It's really no different than the full evening works Tharp, Mark Morris, Graham, Ailey etc ... have created over the years that have played at the Joyce, City Center and elsewhere. The only difference is that this one is playing in a Broadway theatre at Broadway prices (you can see Tharp's company doing similar 90 minute works at the Joyce for $45). I guess Movin Out is also a jukebox musical (though the relationship between the music and the story is so tenuous at times it almost feel like a revue .... then again ultimately the most accurate term for it is "modern dance ballet").. It is also the only other succesful Broadway jukebox musical so far besides Mamma Mia (Movin Out recouped a while back, has made a nice profit and is doing very well on the road).

[lildogs]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:14pm

The dialogue in Side is just bio info on Sondheim. I understand your being devil's advocate, but i think it's pretty clear what the differences are. I'm not defending Sondheim per se, but rather making what I feel is a clear distinction--also I included Smokey Joe's and Fosse, which have nothing to do with Sondheim, but are revues nonetheless. The jukebox musicals have characters, fictional settings, and a traditional book. And yes, the actors in Side play "characters" but only within the context of each song.

[WonderBoy]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:17pm

I'll second the notion that part of the jukebox musicals downfall is the use of pop songs and not theatrical material. I think it's also has to do with what era the music is from. I think that music before the 1950's is better suited for a jukebox musical (a la AINT MISBEHAVIN' although I still consider it a review). MAMA MIA while still modern pop tunes does well because ABBA's music is pretty theatrical to a degree. Also the fact that it's been one right after the other, The Beach Boys, Elvis, Lennon, etc. That certainly doesn't help the situation. I hated SMOKEY JOE'S CAFE but it was a well put together revue. Had they tried adding a story to it I think it would have bombed big time.

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:22pm

What about a show like "Crazy For You?"

Gershwin songs, yes, but from a variety of different sources, including Broadway, film and stand-alone songs. Loosely based on "Girl Crazy"'s plot, but still not the same.

I classify this as a jukebox musical, and a succesful one.

[lildogs]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:22pm

Thank you Margo--as always you say it better--now tell us about Isam

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:25pm

I agree that "Crazy For You" is a jukebox musical -- it just used a jukebox a lot older than some of these recent ones

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:27pm

"All Shook Up, the only one I saw and was able to see good things in"

When you saw it, you said "oh, well, the second act was 'cute'"

Now you see good things in it?

Hmmmm....why's that?
____________

What about Smokey Joe's Cafe?

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:34pm

This isn't exactly the question I was asking. I mean, I myself like I stated, am not a huge fan...but here's what I find interesting. ASU didn't get raves, but I don't think got awful reviews, but many people say it's a good show, with a well-constructed plot and the songs worked in well. Despite this, it is not doing wonderful at the box office. So with this in mind, how will people choose to pursue jukebox musicals, when one that some actually consider to be the best example of the genre is not selling?

BSo, do you really want me to go into that? I said I definitely know the second act is cute. I also said that I remained confused throughout the first act b/c while I realize that the songs were worked in nicely and the plot was coherent, I couldn't decide whether or not to call that good b/c I was still confused about my own personal feelings of whether I can call a show w/ pre-existing music where the music isn't written specifically for teh plot good. But I have been leaning the other way, I have seen the point about revues, shows based on movies and other material, etc. being not that different and am viewing them differently, and more willing to say I do think ASU had merit. Why are you criticizing me for taking other people's points into consideration and modifying my view point and realized I had been wrong in some of my judgements?

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:36pm

Too funny, Margo! Maybe if we go back far enough, we can invent a new term: "The Gramophone Musical."

...As I pointed out in another earlier thread, the Jukebox Musical has been around as a successful format for years in film. "Singin' in the Rain," "An American in Paris," and even the recent "Moulin Rouge" are all jukebox musicals.

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:40pm

For what it's worth, one of the most beloved musicals of all time is a jukebox musical: 'Singin' in the Rain.' Betty Comden & Adolph Green were given the assignment of writing an original story that would use a bunch of preexisting pop songs (by Arthur Freed and Nacio Herb Brown). And Alan Jay Lerner did the same thing with classic George & Ira Gershwin songs in 'An American in Paris.' Personally, I have no quarrel with jukebox musicals in principle. They can be done wittily (as I think 'All Shook Up' is), or they can be done wretchedly. Whether it's a jukebox show or an original musical, it's all in the execution.

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:41pm

"Despite this, it is not doing wonderful at the box office."

I was at TKTS and some lady wanted to see "that show about the witches." When I said it wasn't on TKTS, she said she would see HAIRSPRAY. I said, "see ASU, it's a lot of fun etc"

"What's it about?" she asked.

"Well, do you like Elvis?"

"No, well, yes, but not in a show."

And P.S.

A revue is not like a jukebox musical. A Revue is actors singing songs, without a plot...really. Shows based on movies are also different because 1) either new songs were added to the movie (ex Hairspray) and/or 2) The whole movie itself was adapted to the stage...

Take a book, turned into a show...

And, hell, I could say Les Mis is in the same boat as Hairspray. There was a book, turned into many different movies - then a stage version was made.

And, looking at some of the movies that came before the show was conceived, there are a lot of similarities between the show and the movies.

"Now you s[ay] good things in it?

Hmmmm....why's that? "

I think you missed my point, I won't go into it though. Updated On: 9/16/05 at 02:41 PM

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:44pm

So, according to two ladies I met in Starbucks, Wicked is a Gramophone Musical of old Gershwin songs.

[lildogs]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:44pm

In the case of ASU, I think it suffers from cmparison to shows that maybe don't work as well--Good Vibrations, Lennon, that have crowded the market. Had it not debuted in the same season as the other shows, it might be doing better. I also think it will have quite a good run on tour as well. You also still had a megahit--Spamalot, theatre fan faves like Piazza and Spelling bee, and a crowd-pleaser like DRS. We also had alot of hot plays this season: Doubt, Pillowman, Glengarry, 12 Angry Men-- all recouped investments-i think it just got lost in the shuffle, but I doubt it will stop future producers from attempting this type of show. It's alot easier to work with composers who are dead.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 9/16/05 at 2:47pm

Well, maybe the problem is that we haven't had talents on the level of Comden & Green and Alan Jay Lerner put together the current crop of jukbox musicals, which is why they have, deservedly such a bad name. Let Terrence McNally, Shaiman & Wittman, Rachel Sheinkin, Eric Idle, Jeff Whitty, John Guare, David Lindsay-Abaire, Nicky Silver et al take a crack at writing and assembling a jukebox musical and maybe one of them could come up with a decent one, rather than the dreck the genre has mostly produced so far.