What Are The Problems with "110 In The Shade"?

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 2:50am

I saw "110 In The Shade" by my only means possible, and I thought it was absolutely beautiful. A compelling story, rememorable songs, and characters you actually care for. However, I went back and read Brantley's review of the show, and he seemed to think that the show wasn't as strong as its leading lady - who was hands-down phenomonal. What exactly is wrong with the story? I don't think it's all that simple of a story. She doesn't go with the guy that your led to believe she does. Heck, she goes with the guy who you don't even think about. File doesn't have much stage time, and he doesn't really have any stage time with Lizzie in which they establish anything. All you have to go on about their relationship is stuff that happened prior to the show, so I don't think anyone really considers him a real option. And I know the score is old-fashioned, but I think its really beautiful. There are a few duds (Evening Star, the first couple of songs), but all of Lizzie's numbers, and "The Rain Song" are great. So what's wrong with the show?

[gustof777]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 2:59am

some said that it's dated and drags a lot but I couldn't disagree more. i was engaged and loving every moment.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 3:04am

I agree. I was so into the story, and I had a big smile plastered on my face when Lizzie said she was beautiful. I thought it was a simple story and a simple script, but it was still ravishing. Maybe it was Audra's performance, but all the dialogue just seemed so natural.

Also, I'm a little confused on the story since I couldn't hear/see everything, but did Lizzie's father pay Starbuck to kiss Lizzie, or did he just give him money so that he'd stay around in hopes of kissing Lizzie?

Also, why does Lizzie go with File? It just seems so random to me. I mean, I understand her thought process, but they don't ever seem to interact with each other.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 3:42am

I saw the show and thought that if it hadn't been for McDonald's strong star turn the show would've gone to shreds for me. I think a lot of the songs slow down the show and the story is too long yet it feels like the end never makes sense. Why does she stay with File? We know WHY she stays with him we never learn HOW she comes to the decision if basically most of the show she has been drooling (and sleeping) with Starbuck. Also, there is never a point we see why File picks Lizzie.
McDonald, Cullum, and most of the cast were great, the book and the score left a bit to be desired (though there were many gems, "Evening Star" should've remained a cut number though, there IS a reason why it was cut for the original run).

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 4:46am

I like Evening Star in that it gives the Rainmaker another song for his underdeveloped character.

[IAMmyownMUSICAL]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 6:34am

Frankly I didn't think there was anything wrong with it. It was the perfect revival, to a great show.

[Dirty_Rotten_Guy]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 6:51am

For me, I think that its one of those shows, like THE APPLE TREE for example, that really needs an amazing star to carry the show. Mind you, I loved 110, but I thought the book and a few songs dragged a bit, and had it not been for Audra's performance, I wouldn't have enjoyed the show NEARLY as much.
So yeah, I mean, the whole cast was amazing, but Audra really carried the show, in my opinion.

[LostLeander]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 7:35am

I think it's a beautiful story. It's pretty simple, and it is a bit dated (Lizzie: Pa! Which man do I choose? H.C.: Doesn't matter, because all that matters is you've been asked!)

But this revival really worked hard to keep everything as naturalistic as possible. I read the Rainmaker, and it's pretty hokey, and they basically lifted many scenes from the play into the musical, and even chunks of dialogue and put them into the songs.

But I'm not sure if I've ever been happier at the end of a musical when the rain does come. I was ESTATIC in my seat.

I think you have to go into the show without a bit of skepticism, and go along with the story (or just watch Audra McDonald) and you won't be led astray.

[LostLeander]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 7:35am

I think it's a beautiful story. It's pretty simple, and it is a bit dated (Lizzie: Pa! Which man do I choose? H.C.: Doesn't matter, because all that matters is you've been asked!)

But this revival really worked hard to keep everything as naturalistic as possible. I read the Rainmaker, and it's pretty hokey, and they basically lifted many scenes from the play into the musical, and even chunks of dialogue and put them into the songs.

But I'm not sure if I've ever been happier at the end of a musical when the rain does come. I was ESTATIC in my seat.

I think you have to go into the show without a bit of skepticism, and go along with the story (or just watch Audra McDonald) and you won't be led astray.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 8:36am

I really enjoyed the Roundabout production of the show. However, the NYC Opera presented it several years ago and, despite marvelous work by Karen Ziemba as Lizzie, the musical became tedious when the Curry boys started worrying about their sister.

Just after the show's rights were released (was that in '66?) I worked on a summer stock production of 110 that was absolutely horrid. Starbuck was played by a paunchy Cuban with a thick accent. (He's also did Lancelot in CAMELOT for the theater that same season!) File was played by an actor with all the personality of a twig and Noah had a lisp. Although the Lizzie was uite good, she couldn't salvage the mess she was cast in.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 9:25am

I thought a lot of the problems with the show were in the casting. The men simply weren't up to Audra McDonald. Starbuck was played and costumed like some sinister carny from hell (who in their right mind would trust their daughter to that greasy mulleted bum?) and the two brothers never got beyond mere caricature.

A big problem is the fact that Lizzie is supposed to be PLAIN. This is an accepted fact in the world of that play. Lizzie has been told all over the place, often, to her face, that she is PLAIN. And there is simply no way that I can believe that anyone in anything approaching possession of their faculties could ever think of Audra McDonald as being plain. Ever. One of the big scenes of the musical was ruined when Noah, the brother who is trying to save Lizzie a good deal of heartache, tells her to her face to lower her expectations because she is PLAIN. The audience I saw it with laughed at a scene that should have brought tears.

Now I think the whole thing could have worked, even with the radiant magnificence of Audra McDonald throwing the play out of whack, if Lonnie Price had seen what was going on and worked with Ms. McDonald so that other characters only saw a down and out version of Lizzie, or something, so that it would make sense that men all over town weren't beating a path to her door.

But no. The director who let Starbuck be played as some escapee from the Texas Chainsaw Massacre isn't interested in doing that kind of work. Hell, he even borrowed the set from the revival of FIDDLER ON THE ROOF.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 10:01am

I agree that Lonnie Price leaves much to be desired as a director. As I said, I enjoyed this production, but did you notice the way Price let people carry Lizzie's lemon cake around? That damned cake would have been a shambles if anyone opened the carrying case to eat what she supposedly baked for the picnic.

Similarly, there was so much fuss about packing and unpacking the picnic basket wand when items dropped, it was so very obvious that they were made of plastic. Wouldn't a good director realize that plastic is anachronistic to the play's setting? He could have requested that tin or wooden plates be used.

I must admit, though, Price came up with some interesting tableaus for the revolving stage. Still, he's not one of the better directors around these days.

[Jon]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 12:59pm

She goes with File because she wants something real - Starbuck is a dreamer.

[defyingravity11]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 1:19pm

Maybe people think that the Lizzie's decision at the end is random is because they have forgotten about Lizzie and File's conversation at the end of the first act. I know it took me a while to remember that they had developed a relationship.

[ahmelie]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 1:24pm

I always thought she stayed with File mainly because of her family, if she were to go away with Starbuck it's likely she wouldn't see them for a very long time.

Oh, and I haven't cried so hard at a show in a very long time. I was bawling when I saw this!

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 2:09pm

I really don't understand how choosing File was unexpected and random.

There's a whole song "Simple Little Things" that tells you who she was going to choose. It was quite obvious from the first Act, IMO.

Updated On: 8/10/07 at 02:09 PM

[Broadwayboy2631]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 2:19pm

The plot with File is underdeveloped and he's a very boring character. Most of the score is soooooooo gorgeous, but songs like "Poker Polka" are just hokey and stupid. its obvious that that song is just there so Lizzie can make a costume change.

[kellybean2]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 2:25pm

She sings Simple Little Things before she meets Starbuck, Scotty. Meeting Starbuck opens her eyes to new things.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 2:37pm

No she doesn't Kellybean2. She sings "Simple Little Things" as a retort to his "Melisande."

I don't think the idea of her going with File is obvious at all, and like I said, it makes perfect sense why she wouldn't go with Starbuck. She says, "Melisande is a name for one night, but Lizzie will do me my whole life." I think that sums it up.

And I thought the set was beautifully stark. And the turntable worked rather well. I liked in "Old Maid" where Audra comes running around and she sees the couple kissing. That's brillant.

[kellybean2]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 2:43pm

Oh sorry, my mistake.

I still don't think it's obvious, though, that she's going to end up with File.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 6:11pm

Oh me either. I think it's sort of on your mind at the begining, but then you slowly forget about File, and you think that Starbuck is going to stay and all is better, but it doesn't work out like that. It's sort of an unhappy ending, but still happy - if that makes sense.

[broadwaybaby086]

Posted: 8/10/07 at 6:55pm

Yeah, by the time she makes the decision, I had all but forgotten about File. It seems that his part is underdeveloped, though; most people in the audience (at the revival) talking afterwards seemed to have favored Starbuck. I agree with the unhappy/happy ending. Apparently at some stage in the creative process- I haven't read The Rainmaker but I assume the ending is the same, so perhaps during the writing of the source play- there wasn't rain at the end, but it was added to give Starbuck at least a little bit of something.

The first act is weak; it definitely drags. I love it, but the first time I saw it I was ready to either nap or leave after the first act. I'm glad I took a return trip because I really loved everything the second time around. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that it is...sixty years old, and the pacing of the stage musical has since changed dramatically, especially over the last ten years or so. It takes some adjustment on the part of the audience member to remember how to receive something so simple and in no way flashy, yet poignant and beautiful.

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow]

Posted: 8/11/07 at 3:31am

I guess I always knew Lizzie would prefer making babies and feeding her hungry man over going from town to town promising rain that might or might not come.

[violet72]

Posted: 8/11/07 at 1:21pm

I loved this show and thought the direction and set was great. If you look at the old script they cut some stuff, like a ballet sequence or two. I know people called it old fashion, but sometimes I want to go to see something like this and get caught up in the characters

I think before the show starts she has had a thing for File but it could never happen because he was so closed off. He kept her at a distance cause he was afraid of getting hurt himself again. I believe that part of the story is really established during a man and a women. I also think he takes her for granted thinking she will always be there until Starbuck asks her to go with him and it is then that he realizes he has to ask her not to go so she will not leave him like his wife. She stays with him because he offers her everything she has ever dreamed

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 8/11/07 at 1:25pm

Absolutely nothing. Great show