It's interesting, the title of this thread asks "Who's the best director working in New York Theatre?," but the original post asks about "great, visionary directors." Although I admire Jack O'Brien and George C. Wolfe for their versatility, I would hardly call them visionary. Visionary directors are people like Robert Wilson, Richard Foreman, Elizabeth LeCompte. The last great, visionary director to work on Broadway was Julie Taymor. The best young hope is Daniel Kramer, whose production of Woyzeck at St. Ann's Warehouse was the best thing I saw in all of 2006.
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/5/04
I certainly agree with Kramer and thought his WOYZECK was one of the best things I saw last year. I didn't include him only because that was the only production of his I've ever seen (I've seen multiple productions by everyone else I named). He's also pretty firmly set on establishing himself in London and I don't know when we'll see his work in New York again. But he's certainly as promising a director as exists currently on either side of the Atlantic.
LeCompte may be my favorite director and the one who is a truly innovative visionary among her contemporaries. I know Foreman has stated that he's leaving stage behind for now and concentrating only on film, at least in the near future, which is why I didn't mention him. Taymor is fascinating, but she doesn't work enough in theatre for me to include her.
Wilson always creates eye-popping stage pictures, but I've not often been a fan of the content of the works themselves, finding them muddled and too eliptical for may tastes. He's certainly important and influential though.
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/21/06
some repeats from margo's list, but only because i agree
Jack O'Brien (such strength and versatility)
Nicholas Hytner
Bartlett Sher
Doug Hughes
Daniel Sullivan (such lovely sensitivity every time)
Michael Blakemore
John Doyle (yes, I'm a fan of his intimacy and inventiveness)
George C. Wolfe
Matthew Bourne (UK) (ill forgive a lazy edward scissorhands)
David Leveuax (greatly controversial and inconsistent, but I always appreciate the boldness and beauty of his choices, however inappropraite)
Deborah Warner (UK)
I don't find myself to be a negative person, but I had considerable trouble trying not to mention those whose work i loathe - most of them somehow getting a great amount of work.
Chorus Member Joined: 6/19/05
I'm going to have to agree with Margot Channing on this one. John Rando is one of the most un-inspired directors of our time.
His work is boring to watch and lacks any sense of surpise.
I strongly believe he is the sole reason for The Wedding Singers' failure!
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/5/04
I loved Leveaux's productions of Jumpers, The Real Thing, Electra and Anna Christie (and thought his production of Betrayal to be quite good), but wasn't crazy about his work on Fiddler, Nine and Menagerie. You're right that he's inconsistent, but with the right material he can be brilliant.
I haven't seen Bourne's Scissorhands yet (it comes to BAM in a couple of months), but greatly enjoyed his Swan Lake.
And you're right that some of the worst directors seem to work the most frequently.
Margo-
Foreman has a new work in New York right now.
Wake Up, Mr. Sleepy! Your Unconscious Mind is Dead!
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/5/04
I guess that's one of the film-based/multimedia projects incorporating live action that he's been working on. Could be interesting.
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/23/05
Also Sam Mendes
Sam Mendes is uninspired. His GYPSY and VERTICAL HOUR, while technically solid, are hardly anything special from a directorial standpoint.
John Rando is the reason Wedding Singer ran as long as it did--it was an entertaining audience pleaser. You can't blame The Dinner Party on Rando--it's one of Neil Simon's worst plays ever.
And the one thing Urinetown was not is "boring"--far from it. Urinetown was one of the best-directed shows I've ever seen...and the direction was not stolen from the Fringe. I saw it in both places and John Rando's work on it was magic. And it won him a Tony as Best Director, in a category that included Trevor Nunn, James Lapine and Michael Mayer.
Updated On: 1/18/07 at 08:44 PM
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/5/04
Sorry, but I don't Rando is even among the top 50 directors to work in New York in the past decade. I think that he's just a very lucky man with a very limited talent who has never created anything approaching the sorts of transcendent, innovative, unique visionary kind of work that many of the directors named in this thread have become known for. Not even close.
Leading Actor Joined: 1/9/05
Bob Crowley! Bob Crowley!
Only Kidding,
I'll go with Jack O'Brian. I consistantly like his work, even when the material itself is rotten (Hairspray.)
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/23/05
John Rando is the reason Wedding Singer ran as long as it did
Which wasn't very long so that isn't saying much.
Featured Actor Joined: 12/20/06
Where is the James Lapine/Joe Mantello love?
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/20/04
Mantello's more of a mixed bag. He's had as many disappointments as he's had hits.
Michael Mayer
James Lapine
Michael Blakemore
I would consider Lapine a much better writer than I would a director but what do I know?
Lapine is a great writer when he has someone like Sondheim or Finn to work with. His plays are terrible; FRAN'S BED and TWELVE DREAMS are among the worst plays I've ever seen.
No one.
There is no one working today who displays the vision Michael Bennett displayed in Company, Follies, Chorus Line and Ballroom.
No one who displays the vision Hal Prince displayed in Company, Follies, A Little Night Music and Sweeney Todd.
No one who displays the vision Tommy Tune displayed in Nine and Cloud Nine.
No one who displays the vision Bob Fosse displayed in Pippin and Chicago.
No one.
Understudy Joined: 7/30/05
Theatre's too expensive for visionaries to find success. There is very little room for innovation, especially in New York theatre. It is the regional companies who are mounting truly innovative and provocative work, and who are hiring risky, visionary directors. Less cost, less to loose, makes more sense. Places like Toronto, Chicago, Boston, San Fransisco, these are where the theatres with the truly new and exciting work are. New York just doesn't make sense.
I completely agree about the staging of Woyzeck. Stunning, beautifully chilling, and completely visionary.
I would say Jack O'Brien is the director that I most consistantly love. His staging of Coast is incredibly moving and fluid, and striking (especially in Shipwreck).
I will agree with you Jesus about more risk being taken in regional theatres due to the high costs and pressures of mounting visionary theatre on Broadway.
I will say, very cautiously, that despite opinions about the content of the show, Michael Mayer's work on Spring Awakening has to be one of the more visionary concepts I've seen on BROADWAY in a while. I'm not saying he is the most visionary director, I'm just saying as far as Broadway is concerned, it is probably the freshest thing I've seen in a while. Would you agree? (Respond very quietly, before they come running)
Michael Mayer's work on SPRING AWAKENING is extraordinary, but it's the first time I've ever been impressed by his work. In the past I've found his productions to be less than distinctive.
Yeah, what the hell happened to Tommy Tune...is the guy ever going to direct again?
Whoever's directing Legally Blonde.
Videos