This Years Musical Revivals: A Review Summary

[esparza 333]

Posted: 4/9/09 at 6:16pm

Last year was no doubt the year of Musical Revivals. While we had some excellent original productions we had three innovative revivals. Gypsy, South Pacific, and Sunday in the Park With George all and stunning casts and reinterpreted the original texts in a very fulfilling away. This year was kind of reverse with very mixed feelings about the musical revivals.

The musical revivals began with Pal Joey directed by Joe Mantello. The show opened to mostly negative reviews. Many people felt it did not contain the very needed sexuality and sleaziness that Pal Joey usually contains. People also noted Risch's lack of charisma and Channing's very unimpressive vocals. The only unanimous rave about the show was Martha Plimpton's scene stealing work as Gladys Bumps.

The next revival was Guys and Dolls directed by Des McNuff.T he show also opened to mostly negative reviews. Critics noted that it very joyless and did not contain the energy and comic stamina which Guys and Dolls is famous for. The critics also were not kind to the cast except Kate Jennings Grant, Mary Testa and sometimes Bierko.

The next was West Side Story directed by the original book writer and director Arthur Laurents. This production received mix reviews with a few raves and a few negatives. The new spanish lyrics were mixed across the line with some saying it cancelled out some of Sondheim's most poignant and raw lyrics. The women in the cast were for the most part well received with Olivo getting unanimous praise despite some concerns over her dancing ability. The men were not as well received with many feeling they fell flat.

The last was Hair directed by Diane Paulus. The production opened to very positive reviews with many raves. Paulus's direction was especially praised for her genius breaking of the fourth wall and creating a very raw, intimate production utilizing all of the stage and auditorium. The leads Creel and Swenson were given unanimous raves for their electrifying performances. Hair which was definitely the best reviewed of them all is as of now the frontrunner for the Best Revival Tony with West Side Story following close behind.

Now my question is what do you think made the revivals of Pal Joey and Guys and Dolls very unenthusiastic productions. Was it the direction, the performances etc.? Also what made West Side Story and Hair more successful?

Soon I will post an analysis on this years play revivals.

Updated On: 4/9/09 at 06:16 PM

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 4/9/09 at 6:26pm

This isn't as much of an analysis as it is a summarization of what the critics said.

That said, I rather enjoyed PAL JOEY; Risch was a fine dancer; Channing more than acted her role; Plimpton was the whole package.

[esparza 333]

Posted: 4/9/09 at 6:33pm

YankeeFan You are right. I change the title.

[chrisampm2]

Posted: 4/9/09 at 6:51pm

Actually, esparza333, did you see Hair? Seems your summary switches to commentary there. The breaking of the fourth wall does not seem to be an example of Paulus' "genius" but a given of the text.

I too enjoyed Pal Joey and thought it was plenty sexy. Perhaps it was a production that took its time to find itself.

To me, the lack of success of productions like G&D lies in lack of trust in the material. This doesn't preclude a strong directors' concept, so long as that is tied to insight into the material. McAnuff provided neither. I felt many of Laurents' changes hoped to bring Tony and Maria, (the Romeo and Juliet spine) to the fore. I felt, without the quality of actors and characters his Gypsy offered last year, this sapped the show of energy but I appreciated the intent.
Updated On: 4/9/09 at 06:51 PM

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 4/9/09 at 7:35pm

PAL JOEY's biggest flaw was Richard Greenberg's new script. Risch wasn't that bad and by many accounts seemed to grow into the role. He didn't have much charisma, but he certainly had charm and could dance (even if he did sweat a lot). As I said, Channing was more than merely "good" in the role and all the critics pointed that out.

The flaws of GUYS AND DOLLS are two utterly charmless and miscast leads; a looming, behemoth set; and new directorial "concepts" that showcase a complete mistrust of the material.

HAIR, at least HAIR in the Park, was a joyous production, a really, really, really fun party, well-sung, well-danced, more-or-less well-staged.

WEST SIDE STORY I haven't seen. And I don't really plan to any time soon.

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 4/9/09 at 8:23pm

Having seen them all now, I would give the palm with no hesitation to Hair. WSS disappointed and PJ and G&D ranged from mediocre to downright awful.