BOMBAY DREAMS

how about Calhoun?

---

Calhoun might be a very interesting pick -- seems to be roughly the right age and "Big River" demonstrated that he understands how to re-think an established musical work and stage it for the better.

Jerry Mitchell's name always seems to come up in these sorts of discussions, but while he's certainly young and gifted, I wonder if he's too "showbiz" and "pizzazz" for "Hair"?

George Wolfe is always interesting, but can sometimes be too somber and intellectual for the material ("Wild Party" and "On The Town" should have had more dance and energy -- Mitchell would have probably been a better fit for both).

Sam Mendes is an interesting thought, just looking at what he did with "Cabaret."

Leveaux is, I think, much better with plays (and solid texts) than musicals -- "Hair" in his hands sounds like a disaster.

Most other Broadway directors are, I think, a little too old-fashioned in their sensibility. There are some very talented people who work off-Boradway and regionally, but while they may have the right sensibility, they generally don't have much experience with an $8 - 10 million revival.

---

Only an infant would believe there's a BEST show. To me, they are all different and lovable in their seperate ways, and I don't have really have a favourite. Then again, in my opinion, Tanz der Vampire beats a lot of the stuff that's been done in Broadway in the last twenty years. It has everything... great chorus, stamina, talent, extravagant score, a time-capsule of the last three-hundred years of music. It's just totally NOT what it was on Broadway. Sweeney Todd would have to follow it, if not equal with it, but it's the best thing (easily) I have ever heard on Broadway. I know a lot of great shows, as well, that have never made it to NY, but they could fry the pants off of the last five seasons EASILY. Which goes to shame, that Broadway should be ashamed of not investing in undiscovered talent. Such is life

---

No one denies Cohan's influence on Broadway as a songwriter and impresario, however, he never created one show that could objectively be termed as great (which is the point of this thread). The musical in his era was far more concerned with big production numbers and spectacle than with integrating music and dance to tell a story and propel it forward. In Cohan's time, books were an afterthought -- no real character development and the plots were threadbare and perfunctory at best (often "plot" consisted of a bunch of jokes and vignettes used to break up the musical numbers and give the stagehands time to change the set).

There's a reason we very rarely see any of the early shows from the 1910's and 1920's of Cohan or Irving Berlin or Cole Porter or the Gershwins or Rodgers and Hart -- while many of the shows contain classic songs, the books were very mediocre by today's standards, with no attempt being made for the songs in the show to spring organically from plot and character -- something we've come to expect in the last 70+ years (unless the show is specifically revue). After "Showboat" in 1927, the book musical grew up and the artform changed for the better.

While "Little Johnny Jones," perhaps Cohan's best show, was certainly popular in its day and contained some very famous songs, it's not much of a musical (the Donny Osmond revival back in the 80's ran exactly ONE performance on Broadway). Cohan was the primary exponent of a type of old-fashioned musical comedy that became obsolete after "Showboat," "Porgy and Bess" and "Oklahoma" -- which pointed musical theatre into new, bolder directions, fully integrating music with plot and dance and serious subject matter and once creative people (and audiences) saw all the new posibilities of the form, they never looked back (though there are occasional exceptions, i.e. Mamma Mia).

---

Danielle would also be an interesting pick. Haven't heard much from her in the last couple of years.

---