WEST SIDE STORY best musical ever!? — Page 2

The greatest musical of all time is "Follies" followed closely by "My Fair Lady" and "Gypsy".

---

I can't pick just one for "best musical ever," but I'd definitely put West Side Story at the top of any best musicals list.

See wickedrentq's rationale above. Sums up my thoughts pretty much. Plus WSS happens to be one of my personal favorites - mostly because of the brilliant dancing.

I feel bad for the RENTheads who don't like the music in WSS. Jonathan Larson was a huge fan of that score. He mentions it in Tick Tick Boom.

"I don't think Rent or Les Miserables could ever be considered the best overall musical of all time, if there is a such a thing. If we're looking at all elements of a musical, there needs to be great dancing. Miserables has no dancing and Rent has very little. Thus, they don't qualify even though the music is great."

WHAT? A musical does not have to have dancing to be considered the best or one of the best musicals of all time. That's ridiculous. I don't think either is the greatest musical of all time, but by your standard, your neglecting some of the greatest material out there. Like Sweeney Todd, for example.

Speaking of WSS, is it still supposed to be revived on Broadway next year?

Well GYPSY is generally considered the best book musical of all time. There is a thread on this from several months ago.

I feel really bad for Rentheads, that is all I'm going to say. Expand your limited theatre taste! RENT has some of the worst Broadway lyrics ever.

"Well favourite/obessed most with... same thing really."

Favorite isn't necessarily the same thing as best.

Gypsy is one of the best musicals of all time, but it is not even in my top 10 as far as favorite (while fairly mediocre shows like RENT are in my top 10).

---

Some great points brought up here.

Jon has a great point about West Side being in Tick Tick Boom...a bit of it is also included in Avenue Q(and it's acknowledged that they took that bit from WSS), in Purpose: "Could it be, yes it could, something's coming, something good"...from "Something's Coming." Still influencing musicals a lot today.

In terms of influential musicals, obviously Showboat and Oklahoma are right up there with WSS, and again arguing the little nitpicky points about which of those is most influential is ridiculous (though I was thrilled WSS was voted most influential ) Influential certainly plays a part but is not the only thing that acknowledges best I think. Take Oklahoma. For the time it was made, it was groundbreaking and EXTREMELY influential. No matter my feelings on the show, I can't deny that. But I wouldn't argue it as one of the best musicals--the dream ballet is much better executed in WSS for example. Then again for the time, it was pretty amazing, and one wouldn't fault that for example. It's hard but I think if we're just talking "best" we need to let time play a bit of, but not a huge, factor. Showboat I mean was obviously fantastic for its time, considering there were no musicals w/ plots around, but obviously it has its flaws.

ABoyLikeThat, the only show I've ever heard perhaps described as "perfect" is Gypsy, and...this is totally another thread, why I think personal bias comes in when picking the one best, but I personally think WSS's amazing score and choreography makes up for its small flaws to be on Gypsy's level. Gypsy aside, what shows would you call perfect and please explain their perfection.

I'm not sure where dancing comes into play. A great musical doesn't have to have dancing, but it can be important. Maybe when you get up to the best of the best, some shows are so close that one having amazing dancing and not having any separates them? I don't know. I feel like it doesn't influence the greatness of any show, but when you're comparing, the show that doesn't have dancing has to surpass the other show in other elements maybe?

And let's be honest. My 3 favorite shows are West Side Story, Wicked, and Rent. I pretty much equally love them all for different reasons. I "get" Rent and Wicked, I acknowledge their positive aspects. But if I'm arguing the best show, I cannot overlook their flaws. I still love them, a LOT more than Gypsy as I've already mentioned, but there is no question in my mind that Gypsy is a better musical.

Finally, I'd like to hear more arguments than just answers. Those of you who have said you wouldn't even consider West Side Story as one of the best, please explain why. And I know arguments for Gypsy, but would like to hear more in-depths reasoning for some of the others shows you guys have chosen as the best.

BTW, as demonstrated by my signature...I am absolutely loving reading some of the comments said here

---

West Side Story is an incredible show, but as far as being the best musical ever, the lyrics are subpar Sondheim and the book is a little flowery. BUT these are only opinions, and Sondheim wrote his most memorable lyrics (helped by the popularity of the movie) for West Side Story. I can't see how anyone could ever be bored by this score. It's vibrant, surprising, memorable, and often beautiful. The songs are a part of our cultural landscape.

Often people criticize the dancing gangs thing to be ridiculous. I don't really get why this is so ridiculous. After all, they are... singing, aren't they? Aren't they on a stage? Wearing costumes? Is it so ridiculous that they may dance too?

Theater isn't meant to be real. That's why they make movies.

As for RENT being a realistic musical, RENT is a fairy tale with a slight bite. When it first came out it received criticism because it sugar coated its time and issues. This is the musical that gives us such maxims as "No Day But Today!". RENT is nearly overflowing with sappiness. It tries to be real, but if you poke one hole in it it all falls apart.

And really, it's not the greatest score. The lyrics suck. The music is fun and catchy, sure, but I think it's already starting to show its age (not that it was really ever contemporary). For all of RENT's enormous success, it's heartbreaking that Jonathan Larson never had the chance to write something that may actually have lasted forever.

I think it's subjective. After all, we know that Gypsy is a great musical because every element is perfectly aligned and well done.

I think the real strengths of a show are how memorable its characters are. Musical books can be great but by their nature they must be slim and forgotten. Great choreography will always live in the moment it was conceived and presented. Great lyrics usually need great music to go along with it (although it's not and vice versa) and great music will live forever with or without the show to back it up. History proves, in fact, that the other elements must be up to par and as integral as the music to have any longevity. But all these things come together to bring us characters like Mama Rose, Mrs. Lovett, Bobby, Margaret Johnson, Carmen, Tosca, Butterfly, go back as far as you want.

In a case like West Side Story, Anita is about the most memorable character, but the characters are archetypes, they're characters we've known all our lives. And they sing some great songs. This is a case of all the elements aligning just right.

And then take Gypsy. All the elements are aligned just right except there's that pesky Mama Rose, who's so well written and interesting she elevates the whole thing to the next level.

---

Haha! Subways are for Sleeping! BEST MUSICAL EVER.

---

I think we need a definition for what best is. We've established that "best" and "favorite" are not the same things--and although I went off on what musicals are influential, "best" and "influential" are not the same thing, either. What's meant by best? For example, as far as I'm concerned, "Company" is one of the most perfect scores ever created. It's one of my favorites, but more than that, I just think the score is perfect, doesn't have a bad moment in it. The book has its flaws--but even if the book was as perfect as the score, would it still be the best?

Many people have said that despite the fact that WSS has its share of flaws (memorable but silly lyrics, etc.) and that it isn't exactly their favorite, they still think it's the best. So I'm wondering what the accepted definition of "best" is.

Keaton...I personally view "best" as the combination of the closest to perfection as it could be(or if there are flaws, how many and how much do they take away from the show/how big they are, etc) while taking into account any aspects they not only did perfectly, but transcend(ed), going above and beyond in a certain area. IMO, WSS did that with dancing...perhaps orchestrations, but dancing more so. Influence should be taken into account I think, just not that much.

But that's why I think it's too difficult to argue for one best. People seem to agree that Gypsy is a perfect show, so it makes sense for them to choose it as best. IMO, because I feel aspects of WSS transcended what was called for, that makes up for its little flaws here and there. When picking one best, I think biases/favorites have to come in, which is why I said it's much more subjective to discuss some of the best.

I mean clearly each aspect has to be great if not perfect...score, book, appropriate choreography, the songs fitting in the show appropriately, each act being strong, etc.

---

WSS is definitly a classic musical and by far one of the best. Although I love it to death, it's not the BEST.

---