WEST SIDE STORY DC SO MAD!- Page 4

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 3:00am

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 3:53am

And sure, theater can be very straightforward and realistic, but it can also be theatrical. It doesn't have to be realism for the sake of realism.

If there's nothing wrong with making rape theatrical, then there's nothing wrong with making rape realistic either.

Amongst other reasons, I'd rather spare the lengthy thread questioning whether the Jets *really* raped Anita ala Spring Awakening.

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 7:05am

Gypsy4, to answer your question, one can not really tell when this takes place as no indication is given in the program, and you certainly can't tell by the costumes or hairstyles. I mentioned in another post that maybe this was deliberate to give this production a "timeless" feel (which I don't necessarily agree with).

I also agree that Anita's rape shouldn't be staged the way it presently is. It's very gritty, but doesn't fit in with the rest of the production (if that makes any sense). It certainly made me feel uncomfortable (maybe that's the point).

Updated On: 12/21/08 at 07:05 AM

[Gypsy9]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 8:13am

Having seen the original production at the Winter Garden in the late 1950's, I cannot understand the apparent butchering of the "Somewhere" ballet sequence. It was so important to the healing process not only for the characters on stage but for the audience as well. Still, I am looking forward to seeing Laurents's revival. What theatre will be used; is it the Palace?

[EnWashingtonHeights]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 8:17am

I saw it yesterday. The actors were amazing (Matt C. was just ok though) I thought act 2 was a little choppy and Krupkey (SP?) feel flat.

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 11:34am

Gypsy: Yes, it's the Palace.

It's my understanding that, in 1957, they couldn't get away with showing a literal rape (or near-rape) in a musical. Now they can, so they are.

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 1:33pm

Hmm, I wish I had a better understanding of the "copyright" law as far as WSS and the Robbins estate is concerned. It is generally known that Robbins' choreography for WSS is copyright, so I always that meant that every bit of choreography has to be the same -- yet people are saying the choreography for "America" is different, the choreography for the rape scene is different, and the Nightmare is cut. If anyone has some information on this stuff, I'd be very appreciative to have a better understanding.

Re: The Somewhere Ballet, not that I'm defending the cutting of parts of it in any stretch of the imagination, but I think people are a little confused about what is exactly cut -- the pretty parts of the ballet, the hope it is offered is what people seem to be upset with, while, from my understanding, all of that stuff is in, just the nightmare sequence is cut -- when the music changes, and Riff and Bernardo come back and the Rumble happens again. I hate that it's cut, and have already ranted, but just for everyone's info.

[miss pennywise]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 1:40pm

I think Arthur Laurents has much more "control" than the "estates" since he is still living and is one of the original creators. But I'm no legal expert.

Updated On: 12/21/08 at 01:40 PM

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 1:51pm

Well you know, that makes sense considering everything for WSS says something to the extent of "directed, choreographed, and CONCEIVED by Jerome Robbins"

Was Laurents even involved very early on when it was being considered East Side Story? I know Bernstein was.

Hmm, I know Sondheim is in favor of the Spanish, but I wonder where he stands on some of these other decisions...

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 1:53pm

Based on what I read, yes, Laurents was involved even from that very early stage.

[Jon]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 2:07pm

Suposedly, the same is true for Robbinns' FIDDLER ON THE ROOF choreography, yet, in the recent revival, they completely changed the staging of Tevye's Dream (with a flying bride, a la Chagall) and Matchmaker (abandoning the mop dance in favor of the gals giving each other sponge baths), and even altered the opening of Tradition (having the townfolk milling about on stage from the beginning, rather than entering on the vamp".

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 2:55pm

I don't think we're arguing that a realistic rape scene isn't as effective as a theatrical one. If WSS was originally staged like that, none of us would have a problem with it. We wouldn't know any different. But the Robbins staging of the rape scene is embedded in our minds for its powerful use of movement. It fits with the entire flow of WSS. It's a stunning achievement, and to cut it an replace it with what is being reported as pedestrian blocking, isn't letting the material live on the high level it should.

This is obviously Laurents' last chance to veto creative decisions he was overruled on. Maybe he can stage a revival of Anyone Can Whistle next and cut "Simple" and "The Cookie Song".

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 2:59pm

For once Bobby, I agree. I think to make the rape scene ultra realistic ruins the whole feel and flow of the show. It doesn't make sense with the theatrical conventions that were previously set up. I mean, honestly, we're not going for ultra realism. Gangs don't do ballet. I don't think anyone is dancing around the streets in a gang fight. So the more theatrical, movement based rape scene is the way to go.

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 3:02pm

Tell that to Arthur Laurents (which I'm sure no one will).

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 3:16pm

Well, tell him to call me up!

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 3:17pm

You're having enough trouble getting a job in the city Rentboy. I wouldn't complicate it by getting on Laurents' list.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 3:18pm

Um, I have a job?

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 3:20pm

I meant a legitimate equity job, not the mop boy at The Man Hole.

[miss pennywise]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 3:26pm

Just to set the record straight, the "rape scene" is not "ultra-realistic." It is still "choreographed," but it's "grittier."

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 3:48pm

Oh Bobby, you slay me!

[PiraguaGuy2]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 3:53pm

I'm glad to see they're taking SOME steps to ease the silliness of the piece (ultra-choreographed gangbanging, Spanish dialogue/lyrics) while ignoring others (SPERM TO WORM! WOMB TO TOMB! FRABBO JABBO! BOY I WISH ARTHUR LAURENTS KNEW HOW KIDS TALKED!

[miss pennywise]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 4:29pm

Fortunately, the actors don't really "speak" those lines. They kinda "mumble" them so you don't really know what they're saying--unless you're theatre geeks like us and already know!

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 5:18pm

All right, I will say ONE thing in defense of the dialogue...

"Sperm to worm" is at least a little better than the movie version -- "Burst to earth" -- I mean, womb to tomb obviously means, you know, we're there for each other from the beginning till the end, etc, and sperm to worm...means...we're there from as we started before the womb to after the tomb, when we come back to life as a worm??

All right, so it doesn't make sense, but it still fits a little better than burst to earth.

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 7:14pm

Wickedrentq, the movie line is "birth to earth." Makes much more sense.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 12/21/08 at 7:22pm

And the "worm" reference isn't about coming back as a worm but when the worms get through the coffin. (don't you remember: the worms crawl in; the worms crawl out....????)