Why does everyone hate Andrew Lloyd Webber? — Page 2

I don't even hate Evita. But I hate Cats. Oh, yes.

Anyway. I think, if you'll excuse a film metaphor, Andrew Lloyd Webber makes the musical equivalent of big summer blockbuster movies (most likely produced by Jerry Bruckheimer). Sondheim is more like a director who is popular at Cannes, and maybe even wins an Oscar once in a while, but is a little too oddball for a giant mainstream audience. And different people like different things.

Webber is not very subtle, he's grand (meaning big), showy, and commercial. Sondheim is complex, not as easy to understand at first hearing, and chooses some pretty weird stories to tell, often telling them in unconventional ways. I don't like Webber much at all. Lots of people can enjoy both. And we can be very defensive of our opinions. (Sondheim is better, by the way. Look at my avatar.)

---

I'm sure he/she didn't mean ALL theatre people hate Phantom, just that of those who do, the vast majority are. Of course, some theatre people like Phantom and ALW or else you'd never be able to see any of his shows 'cause he couldn't find actors.

Let me start my rant be saying I'm a huge Sondheim desciple and a spokesperson for the "I HATE ANDREW LLOYD WEBBER" PEOPLE OF SOUTHERN ILLINOIS:CHAPTER 26. That said, I think the movie example of summer blockbuster movie vs. high-quality artsy film is a great way to describe it. Shows like Phantom, Mamma Mia!, Les Miz (I love the latter and even kind of like the first, though I recognize their many faults and overrated-ness) have become big successes, and have caused producers to make them the strict model for how to put on a successful new musical. They play it safe, not so much as putting on a good musical as much as putting on a "good" SHOW. Since it's so hard to make money producing on Broadway, even without the multimillion dollar investments, trying something different and couragous is out of the question. Because of that also, the "big" shows such as Cats and Phantom become the "must see show" for non-theatre folks. They see it and either think, A) "Hey, that was nice, but if THAT'S the best they have to offer, than that'll be the last musical I'll see for a while." or B) "WoW, that was overrated! If THAT'S the "best" musical ever, than I'm never going to the theatre again!" Then they never see the musicals that actually are the best we have to offer, like Sweeney Todd, Cabaret, or Company. To the general public, musical theatre isn't an art form. It's supposed to be big, sprakelly, and flashy shows that aren't meant to be ABOUT anything. So they shy away from shows that don't fit that description, so Sondheim shows don't do so well financially.

I don't hate Lloyd Webber personally (though my friends and family would disagree there), he just doesn't write quality musicals. However, in his defense, most of the problems with his shows are with the lyrics or the book, so they aren't entirly his fault.

---

But who is to say that "big blockbuster" musicals aren't good? Who's to say that something has to be "courageous" to be good? What can't there be a happy medium between both styles and to each his own? That is the problem here. People can't just prefer one style without bashing the other. I am a professional musician with a degree in music. I appreciate and like the complexities of Sondheim and Guettel and the like...but sometimes I like the easiness and traditional pop melodies of a Lloyd Webber or a Wildhorn. A few years back I wrote my senior thesis dissecting the works of Brown, Guettel, and LaChiusa (I even went overboard and created a website dedicated to the works of the three). I was (and still am) engrossed in their music. However, I still love to listen to the simpler melodies of ALW, Wildhorn, Yazbeck, etc, where I can get lost in the music and not have to think about it. Sometimes I want to hear a traditional verse/refrain song. This may be a new concept to people, but not everyone wants to always have to think and dissect what they are seeing or try to find some deep social meaning to it. Sometimes people want to go to the theatre to have a good time, laugh a lot, and see the spectacle of enormous sets, fancy costumes, and special effects. That is why a show like Mamma Mia! is so popular. Sometimes people just want to be entertained and leave the theatre smiling. Other times maybe they want to see something darker, or more courageous. There is room enough for all kinds on Broadway. It is not a sin to like Sweeney Todd and Phantom.

---

It's not that people hate the man (and even though I am not his biggest fan, there are several of his melodies that are quite beautiful. The lyrics however .... well that's not Webbers's doing.) But with the huge successes of the spacatcles he has written has come a price: They used the elborate productions to justify ticket price increases which in turn spread across to other less elaborate shows. It set up audience expectations that a Broadway Musical had to have all sorts of special effects and overblown melodies (usually coupled with banal lyrics!)

These shows have attrcated more than their share of attention while other, more deserving shows, have been neglected. Because the Lloyd Webber shows (CATS, STARLIGHT EXPRESS, POTO, SUNSET BLVD) were the main culprits, they take the blame along with the man who wrote the music and produced them.

---