Showing posts with label Christian Borle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christian Borle. Show all posts

Monday, November 25, 2019

REVIEW: Little Shop of Horrors

Review of the Saturday, November 23, 2019 matinee performance at the Westside Theatre/Upstairs in New York City. Starring Jonathan Groff, Christian Borle, Chelsea Turbin, Tom Alan Robbins, Kingsley Leggs, Ari Groover, Salome Smith, Joy Woods, Chris Dwan, Kris Roberts, Chelsea Turbin, Eric Wright and Teddy Udain. Book and lyrics by Howard Ashman. Music by Alan Menken. Scenic design by Julian Crouch. Lighting design by Bradley King. Costume design by Tom Broeker. Sound design by Jessica Paz. Choreography by Ellenore Scott. Direction by Michael Mayer. 2 hours, including one intermission. Closes March 8, 2020.

Grade: A+

What a wonderful thing it is to see a thrilling production of a show you love! Such is the case with the practically perfect off-Broadway revival of Little Shop of Horrors. The show is such fun, made even more so by the cast and production that are completely on the same page, and they are all clearly having a ball.

Visually, the show benefits from being small. There's an inherent quaintness about it. Never once did I think, "wow, imagine how much better this would be if they had more space and added more effects." Instead, the result is both retro and somehow sci-fi all at once. Julian Crouch's Skid Row is wonderfully detailed and feels larger than life, even as the growing plant makes it appear claustrophobic - exactly as it should be, while Bradley King's old school lighting heightens the mock pulp thriller vibe of the piece. All of the above is equally true of Tom Broeker's clever, but on point costuming. My only technical quibble, frankly my only quibble about the whole show, was with Jessica Paz's frequently too loud sound design, where the band over powers the singers in the bigger numbers. Frequently, I had trouble making out what the Urchins were singing, which is a problem considering the deep well of clever creativity in Howard Ashman's lyrics. Fortunately for me, I knew the lyrics well enough to fill in the blanks.

It would be very easy, after settling into a run, to run fast and loose with these characters, overplaying and mugging for the audience. Thankfully, that is not the case here. Every cast member is going full throttle, and obviously having the time of their life. The Urchins (Ari Groover, Salome Smith and Joy Woods) are a riot of sass, funk and soul, delivering their narrator/girl group role with panache. (Ms. Woods was a particular standout for me.) These ladies can SING! Meanwhile, Tom Alan Robbins as the down-on-his-luck, aptly named Mushnik, is a heady mix of old world warmth, almost cuddly, and shrewd, manipulative meany. Let's just say that when he meets his end, it is a good thing. Kingsley Leggs' vocalization of Audrey II equal parts big laughs and sinister creepiness.

Anyone that had misgivings about casting "too cute" Jonathan Groff as Seymour, needs only to see his very first entrance to reconsider those misgivings. He is just amazing, with superb comic timing and, yes, a fully believable nerdiness. His voice is perfectly suited the score. Then there is the incomparable Christian Borle, whose gift for physical comedy and snap-of-your-fingers characterizations recalls the days of such comic genius as Sid Caesar,  Milton Berle and Tim Conway. The treat of his star turn is discovering what he'll be wearing, how he'll be revealed, and how in just one or two lines he will create a full character. But the best thing about his performance is that he never outstays his welcome or becomes self-indulgent. He also nails the pure evil of the maniacal dentist role with a harsh stream profanity and abuse hurled at the sweet Audrey. When he calls her "Slut!" it stung the whole audience.

Sometimes fate brings you wonderful surprises. I had one such surprise in the form of an understudy named Chelsea Turbin. Mark. My. Words. She will be famous. Soon. What a performance! Sweetly naive yet street smart, funny yet tragic, vulnerable yet tough as nails, her Audrey is sheer perfection and the heart of the show. Her voice is five times the size of her entire body, and she has that illusive, intangible "it" factor. Look for her to do big things.

EDIT: Now, the show is scheduled only through March 8th, and tickets are scarce. But if you can get there, or if they extend and you can go later, DO IT! Two of the best hours I've spent in a theater in 2019.

📸: J. Kyler, E. Madrid-Kuser

#2216

Sunday, January 14, 2018

#OneLastTime

The Wonka factory is out of candy
Today, January 14, 2018, is a milestone day on Broadway.  There were many goodbyes to be shared.  Two shows are closing, the revival of Miss Saigon and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.  With those closings, Broadway (and its legions of fans) bid adieu to two-time Tony winner Christian Borle and newcomer (and Tony nominee) Eva Noblezada. Show closings are always bittersweet, but without closings, there's no room for new shows, right?

The Last Night of the World Show

Other shows lose their original stars today - one very high profile, the others with departures that are not headline makers.  Of course, I'm talking about the final performances of Bette Midler (the headline maker), Tony-winner (and Dolly! Tony nominee) David Hyde Pierce, Beanie Feldstein and soon-to-be Evan Hansen, Taylor Trensch in Hello, Dolly! Pierce is a Broadway regular, and Trensch already has his next role, so we won't be without them for long.  But Midler's departure is likely more epic.  Not just because she's a box office powerhouse, not just because it was hard to get her back on the boards even for this short stay, but because she is a legend who gave a legendary performance. People will talk for years about experiencing The Divine Miss M in Hello, Bette Dolly! Maybe she never really disappeared in the role (I never for a second forgot she was Bette Midler), but who cares? She was still magnificent - maybe Dolly Levi is Bette Midler, not vice versa... So long, dearie...


Goodbye, Dolly!


There is another Broadway exit that didn't get a feature story in the Times, or a moment on The Today Show, but it was no less epic for us true Broadway fans.  I'm talking about original Hamilton cast member Javier Muñoz. Terrific performer, yes.  Leader in the company and the community at large, yes. Outspoken activist, yes. Role model, yes. In short, he's the kind of person who makes the world a better place.  I, for one, can't wait to see what comes next from this remarkable human being.


The Hamilton Twitter account posted this lovely tribute to #javilton:


UPDATE/EDIT:

Another unsung Broadway hero, Tommar Wilson, also leaves a show today - a little skit called The Book of Mormon.  Maybe the most remarkable exit of them all that has gotten no press, Wilson has been with the show from the start - 7 years, over 2,000 performances!  What great thing that Josh Gad wasn't too big to remember his friend and co-star. THAT is a tribute!





Thank you all.

(Photos by J. Cervantes, M. Murray)

Monday, April 16, 2012

REVIEW: Peter and the Starcatcher


Review of the Saturday, April 14 matinee preview at the Brooks Atkinson Theatre in New York City.  Starring Christian Borle, Adam Chanler-Berat and Celia Keenan-Bolger.  A new play by Rick Elice.  Based upon the novel by Dave Barry and Ridley Pearson. Music by Wayne Barker.  Movement by Steven Hoggett.  Directed by Roger Rees and Alex Timbers.  2 hours, 30 minutes including one intermission.


Grade: A+


I often take time to look at the critical quotes that are plastered around the theatres on Broadway and smirk at the hyperbole forced wit that inevitably gets those choice words on a sign in the first place.  Many times, after the show is over, I look at them as I leave and smirk even more and even roll my eyes.  "Astonishing!" "A gift to the theatrical gods!" "Raises the roof!" (My personal favorite...)   The Brooks Atkinson Theatre is already adorned with several such huzzahs from the press for the new play Peter and the Starcatcher which opened there last night, having played a critically-acclaimed engagement at New York Theatre Workshop last season.  And if there is any justice in the world, those aforementioned theatre gods will be very happy campers and none of those quotes will cause anyone to roll their eyes or smirk.  I certainly won't - especially as I sit here typing, trying to think of my own bon mot to see on a marquee.  Why?  Because this play is an exhilarating thrill ride of theatricality that will leave even the most cynical theatre-goer flying with a fancy to find the elusive Neverland and bask in the fun of being young once again.


Imagination is really the star of the show here, as it should be, considering we are discovering the making of a myth/legend/boyhood hero like Peter Pan.  This is a world where a golden proscenium frames the proceedings, made up of all things Pan - boy toys like Ninja Turtle action figures, Barrel o' Monkeys, and rubber alligators - vie for space with all things grown up - wine bottle corks and rope configured into sunbursts, while clock pieces and kitchen timers ominously remind that minutes are ticking by.  This is a place where the floor and the walls are made up of old wooden planks just begging to become tree forts, G.I. Joe hideouts, and adventure-filled climbs into old abandoned buildings.  And then the play starts, and so much junk - still ripe with devious ideas of little boys - transforms instantly into not one, but TWO mysterious and devilishly dangerous ships run by pirates and other scurvy scum.

The world of Peter and the Starcatcher as ingeniously designed by Donyale Werle and moodily, thrillingly lit by Jeff Croiter is in a constant state of metamorphosis, as if, like the children who inhabit this world, it grows tired of one notion just as quickly as it dreams up another.  And what a better way to conjure up a world no longer with us and still another that only exists in dreams than by using all of the fanciful things a little boy might carry in his pockets?  Here, a length of rope can be the confines of a ship's small cabin, a the railing around a majestic sailing ship or the crashing waves during storm so mighty, it threatens to blow the ocean's water into outer space.  Here a length of blanket or old sheet can be a nanny's apron, the entrance to a cave or a magical mermaid's tale.  Grubby work boots and tattered pants can be an orphan's play clothes or a sea captain's majestic uniform.  And I may never look at kitchen utensils the same way again - squeeze bottles and hand whisks, for example, tell us we are seeing merMAIDS, not merMEN. (Inventive costumes by designer Paloma Young.)  And just maybe stuffed animals CAN fly - on the end of a stick with wicked cool whooshing sounds and even better man-made cat screams.

The Company of
Peter and the Starcatcher

The boundless imagination of the entire creative staff is the production's greatest asset, very carefully and purposefully guided by co-directors Roger Rees and Alex Timbers.  Watching this production, you can see what each of these talented men brings to the table - Rees won a Tony for working on another epic, creatively told and very British tale, Nicholas Nickleby, while the much-acclaimed young director Timbers (of Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson and The Pee Wee Herman Show on Broadway) brings a modern edginess (and a few modern references dropped into the story just to keep it hip enough for those who need such validation).  It is very clear from the moment it starts that the two captains of this ship are completely in sync.  I often complain that shows will have wonderful concepts that are not fully carried out.  That is most definitely not the case here.

The unity of purpose and the whole methodology of telling this story - a unique vocabulary, to be sure - completely carries over into one on the tightest companies of actors I have witnessed on the stage in several seasons.  And it is not just that they know the intricate staging and movement (created by American Idiot and Once's Steven Hoggett), it is that they are completely and utterly as one.  The star of one scene is a wall in the next; the boy who becomes Peter is just as likely to be giving a monologue as he is carrying of a set piece.  And, frankly, it isn't just a luxury of stylized theatrical storytelling, it is a safety necessity.  There is some seriously breath-taking and downright dangerous stuff being done by these people.  And you never once have that feeling that at any second something could/would go wrong (unlike the utterly different nerve-wracking "thrill" of staging over at the Foxwoods).

The Company

There are a dozen actors in this company that makes a very strong case for the creation of an Ensemble Acting Tony.  It seems almost unfair to single out any of them, so cohesive a unit are they.  But each one makes a great impression. Isaiah Johnson makes a macho turn as the stalwart "good guy captain," no small feat considering he is bound and gagged most of the time!  And Teddy Bergman makes a fun impression in one of his many roles as the worker-bee ship's mate that no one can remember his name.  Matt D'Amico is a spine-tingling pirate with a penchant for capturing orphans and using a whip on them. The Boy's two orphan companions are winningly played by Carson Elrod and David Rossmer, both of whom manage to be great sidekicks and even better friends in the long run.  Greg Hildreth is a teddy bear of a guy with a soft spot in his heart just big enough to make you not hate pirates completely - his sheepish grin will warm your heart.

Kevin Del Aguila and Christian Borle

While every actor in the cast plays many roles, these play the main co-stars.  Kevin Del Aguila makes a sweet, absent-minded yet wise Smee.  Rick Holmes is a terrific father and agent of Queen Victoria's, here on a dangerous mission to rid the world of a mysterious treasure, that requires, among other things, that he be fluent in Norwegian, porpoise and dodo bird!  Both guys are a riot.  But it is Arnie Burton's scene-stealing turn as a British nanny (think a silly Mary Poppins) that is delightful from start to finish.  The man can work a hair bun and wrist purse, let me tell you!

Where to start in praise of the three leading players?  All three are giving Tony-worthy performances of amazing breadth - playing high comedy, low comedy, physical comedy, and a surprising depth of serious drama, too.

Molly and Captain Aster meet the orphans

The lone female in the cast, Celia Keenan-Bolger plays Molly, a self-aware precocious child with the mind of a full grown woman, who wants desperately to grow up so she can go on "missions" with her beloved father.  That she is consistently interesting and lovable while still being a precocious child and still never annoying in that "I-could-be-in-Annie" kind of way is to her credit.  I suppose it helps that she really is an adult woman playing a child that makes her entirely believable, but not ever annoying.  As written, she also gets a beautiful close-of-show scene where she gets to display her considerable dramatic skill.  I dare you to not get at least misty-eyed!

Adam Chanler-Berat and
Celia Keenan-Bolger

Similarly, Adam Chanler-Berat as The Boy (who becomes Peter Pan), gets to show off the complete range of his skills as a physical, comic and dramatic actor.  He gets thrown around the set, chased by the bad guys, fights the pirates, his own friends and Molly, the girl who teaches him to be happy.  Perhaps the most remarkable thing about his masterful performance, though, is that in a sea of theatricality and larger-than-life emotions, some of the best parts of his performance are in the subtleties of his portrayal of  a man-child who wants only to have a home and to spend some time as a real boy before returning to the adult world in which he has already been forcibly and unwillingly to live.  The pain and anguish, disappointment and anger in his large dark eyes betray the bravado of his devil-may-care swagger and world-weary grin.  I found myself immediately drawn to and rooting for this Boy; Mr. Chanler-Berat's performance is the glue that holds the whole thing emotionally together.

Matt D'Amico, Rick Holmes, Isaiah Johnson,
Adam Chanler-Berat and Christian Borle

It is no secret that Christian Borle steals the show here.  When I hear that much hype ahead of time, I tend to go in with a skeptical "Oh yeah? Prove it to me!" attitude, and frequently, I am disappointed.  That is most definitely NOT the case here.  Yes, he threatens to steal every scene he is in, and why not?  Isn't that the goal of every ego-maniacal super villain?  That Mr. Borle throws himself so completely into the role is both expected - he is a terrific actor - and somehow magically surprising.  He plays the evil Black Stache, the pirate who will become Captain Hook.  Equal parts serious villain and wink-wink-nudge-nudge vaudevillian, Borle is a laugh riot and pleasingly dangerous.  He walks that very thin line between broad comedy and over-doing it with the expertise of a high wire artist.  And yet, for all of the impact he makes as the swashbuckling bad guy, I admire that he avoids any sign of "star power" in the scenes where he is a wall, a bench or a one word contributor to a choral reading passage in the stylized script.  I won't be at all surprised if his name is called during the announcement of the Tony nominations.

Playwright Rick Elice has done a truly magnificent job in paring down this complicated story, allowing us to savor each moment without lingering too long, getting us excited and staying there.  There are panto scenes, conventional drama scenes, choral readings and even a production number (music - including terrific musical "sound effects" by Wayne Barker)! And, as the play progresses and the birth of each element of the Peter Pan myth we come in knowing is given birth before us, the show also becomes a series of ah-ha moments.  And he (and credit is due Dave Barry and Ridley Pearson who wrote the novel) does this in such a way that you rarely see it coming.  How does a boy become Peter Pan? Why doesn't Peter ever grow up?  Who are the Lost Boys?  How does Smee come to be?  Why is the ultimate pirate villain soon to become the nefarious Captain Hook?  And how does Peter know where to go to hear the best bedtime stories?  Interested in Tinkerbell?  Why does the crocodile tick like a clock?  All of this and so much more are delightfully revealed in this action-packed thrill ride of a script.  To its credit, too, and like the best thrill rides, there are brief moments in the show to collect your breath reflect on what you've been through and then, stomach in a knot, gulping air in "terror" you see the next thrill and the next ahead until everything finally comes down to that last hill, a fast roar through that proverbial tunnel and you arrive at the conclusion, laughing, cheering and fully sated.  And like the very best amusement rides, when you leave this play, you 'll probably find yourself asking, "Can we go again, PLEASE?"

Black Stache and Company

There is an epic amount of story in this tale of the Boy Who Wouldn't Grow Up, and future creators of  musicals and plays based upon epic works should take note from this master class of succinctness and brevity: say what you have to say in an interesting and memorable way ONCE and move on.  (Take a lesson here, Les Miz!)  And just a note to the folks over at Spider-Man and Wicked: this play is telling the story of a boy who flies without a single rope around his waist, cherry-picker in sight or series of wires sticking out of his back.  And he (and the entire production) not only flies, he soars!  And he never leaves the ground.  The imagination trumps technology every time.


(Photos by O+M Co.)



Jeff
3.228
@jkstheatrescene (Twitter); jkstheatrescene@yahoo.com (email); Comment below (Blogger)



Monday, February 27, 2012

LOGOS: Peter and the Starcatcher

PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO VOTE IN ROUND 5 OF HOT/HOTTER!
AND YOU ONLY HAVE 2 DAYS LEFT TO PICK 
BROADWAY'S MOST ROMANTIC COUPLE!
(LOOK TO YOUR LEFT AND CAST YOUR VOTES!)

Today: A close look at a new show logo, a short documentary of the creation of that logo, and a great trailer previewing the new play, Peter and the Starcatcher.

Childlike.  Simple.  Wonderful.  Nostalgic.  Ageless.  Am I talking about the logo for the new play Peter and the Starcatcher?  The legend of Peter Pan, upon which the play is based?  Or the strange, eye-catching and surprisingly emotional logo created for the Broadway production of the off-Broadway hit.  Actually, I'm talking about all three.


Peter Pan, a timeless myth that speaks to the wonder and innocence of childhood and an abundance of imagination, comes through in the image, and not just because of the title character.  The rustic use of antique wood makes the adult in me feel an instant sense of nostalgia.  The careful piecing together of the lettering and filling in of the letter "holes" is crude, but somehow honest.  I  look at that logo, and I go back in time to when, as a boy, a pile of wood blocks could be anything - a castle, a cave, a pirate ship.  Even the awkward star reminds me of hand-cutting stars out of construction paper and felt for a variety of elementary school projects.

I think one of the reasons the Peter Pan mythology (and, similarly, the fairy tale wonder of the Cinderella story) endures is because it is full of amazing flights of fantasy grounded by real human desires - in this case, the longing to stay young, play every day and face our fears without the added pressure of consequences.  Doesn't everyone wish they had ability to go back and relive some great childhood memories, but with the knowledge and wisdom of age?  Going back to Neverland is a welcome adventure in any form.

The play itself uses a variety of recycled and multi-purpose objects to create another world of wonder, where the cast and audience use their collective imaginations to create a ship, battles, chase scenes and and number of locations and exciting adventures.  The logo, which suggests imaginative use of the materials at hand, does just the same.  Peter and that star, it says, can take us on the adventure of a lifetime - and without technically perfect special effects afforded by computers.  These days, like the shows they represent, logos are just as computer generated.  It is kind of exciting and adventurous that Peter and the Starcatcher, on stage and on paper, is bucking that trend.

Grade: A!


Here is a short film on the actual creation of the artwork for the Peter and the Starcatcher logo:





Click HERE for The New York Times article and interview with logo designer and craftsman John W. Long.

And here's a taste of the whole show:





Jeff
3.183
jkstheatrescene@yahoo.com (E-mail)  @jkstheatrescene (Twitter) "Comment" below (Blogger)

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

REVIEW: Smash


PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO VOTE IN THIS MONTH'S POLL 
AND IN ROUND 2 OF "HOT/HOTTER".  THANK YOU.



Review of NBC Television's Smash (Pilot Episode) which officially aired on Monday, February 6, 2012.  Starring Debra Messing, Christian Borle, Katharine McPhee, Megan Hilty, Jack Davenport, Jaime Cepero, Raza Jaffery, Brian D'Arcy James and Anjelica Huston.  Created and written by Teresa Rebeck.  Original Score by Marc Shaiman and Scott Wittman.  Choreographed by Joshua Bergasse.  Directed by Michael Mayer.


Grade: B+


The fun of the show is in the details: Smash pilot trivia question: What was Julia (Debra Messing) and Tom (Christian Borle)'s first moderately successful show called?  How long did it run?

My mother is a surgical nurse by trade and doesn't watch many medical or procedural dramas on television because she says she can't turn off the professional side of herself.  Every time she sees an operation on television, she can't help but pick apart all of the inaccuracies, the wrong medicines being used, the improper technique.  "All of the surgeons at Seattle Grace," she says with a smirk, "would be in prison for mass murder - especially Patrick Dempsey!"  For her, the technical imperfections overshadow any of the drama and personal goings on in the soap opera that is Grey's Anatomy.  Still, I have always envied people whose passion is medical, forensic, legal or criminal justice.  TV is full of shows that validate them by portraying them at all.

And so, like many of you probably, I came to Smash full of high hopes and outrageous expectations, not to mention a bit of fear masquerading as common sense (read yesterday's blog HERE).  Would a show about my passion - the Broadway musical - validate that passion?  Would it be treated with respect, even if it has to have drama that the general public can relate to?  And most importantly, would the show within the show be any good?  Well, it is hard to put all of my fears and hopes and expectations in one basket, but if the pilot is any indication of the series to come, the answer to all three questions is YES!


While I still stand by my 7 Reasons Why Smash Might Not Be One, the Broadway lover in me really liked it a lot.  OK, I loved it.  What's not to love?  Hell, even the bit parts and walk on roles are being taken by some Broadway greats - Robert LuPone (representing the old guard) all the way to Annaleigh Ashford (representing the new generation).  And it really stars my favorite place in the whole world, New York City! From the Yellow Cab with the American Idiot topper to the stroll through Times Square, to crossing 8th Avenue and 45th, I loved seeing the city being portrayed so beautifully.

I think they have cast the show wonderfully as well, though I'm not surprised that some of the best acting - save for the brilliant work by the deliciously understated Anjelica Huston - is done by the people who actually do Broadway.  Christian Borle is terrific as the gay composer, with the sense to make him so much more than a swishy stereotype.  It is nice to see a confident (outwardly, at least) gay man who doesn't have a purse falling out of his mouth every time he opens it on television.  A guy who is subtle enough to check out his assistant's ass and comment only to his hag partner-in-crime.  Truly, it is is nice to see a gay character portrayed where being gay isn't all that he is.  Bravo to that!  Brian D'Arcy James is so smooth on camera and so instantly likable.  I hope they use him more; he says so much with a pause, gesture and split-second facial expression.  I'll get to the best Broadway starlet on the show in a second...

Debra Messing is a revelation to me here.  So far, she is the glue that holds this show together.  It is nice to see that she can hold back the "Grace" shtick, and still be funny.  And it is really great to see that she can be honest and sincere in serious moments.  I'll admit I was afraid we'd see little more than Will and Grace part II from her.  But her relationship with a gay guy this go round is much more complex and interesting while devoid of any sexuality.  She and Borle have terrific chemistry, and I look forward to some huge fights and fun make ups from them.  It is nice to see her play a woman on the verge, but still in control of herself.


Both Jack Davenport and Raza Jaffrey are terrific enough actors to make the stereotype (the former plays) and the sickeningly perfect supportive boyfriend (the latter plays) interesting despite the limits of the script so far.  Granted this only the pilot, but doesn't Jaffrey seem a bit too good to be true?  And how many sexually ambiguous stage directors who bed every new girl in town  have we seen before?  Less successful is the assistant, played by Jaime Cepero.  Alternately bland as white toast, and maddeningly forthright, I get that we are supposed to be wary of this character.  But with as little nuance (maybe he underplays it too  much) as we get from him, I can't believe neither composer nor lyricist have no familiarity with All About Eve or even Applause.  I can't wait for Debra Messing to bitch slap this kid in a cat fight.  (It HAS to go there, doesn't it?)  And is it me, or can't you see Robin de Jesus in that part?

The central conflict is between Karen, a Broadway newcomer, and Ivy, a chorus girl who has paid her dues and seems on the cusp of stardom in a role she was born to play.  So far, the script has treated them pretty equally.  They both have shitty parent support and they both have confidence issues.  Karen gets extra help from the director (and knows just how to shut him down!); Ivy has the backing of the writers.  Ivy blows the audition piece out of the water, but the director couldn't care less, while Karen knocks her audition out of the park, earning an eye roll and begrudging smirk from the writer.  So far the score is tied between Team Ivy and Team Karen.  Though she hasn't had the chance to show us her dance skills, Katharine McPhee more than holds her own in a cast of big time acting talents.  There really is no disputing that her voicce is top notch, too.  And real Broadway darling Megan Hilty is simply brilliant as the emotionally charged (and impaired) chorus gal ready to take the lead.  She is vulnerable, sexy and a true triple-threat.  She is the real deal.  I am sure that it was intended that an actual American Idol contestant was selected to go up against a real Broadway actress on the cusp of super-stardom, considering the infiltration of those contestants on Broadway.  Thankfully, McPhee seems of the Jennifer Hudson quality and the Josh Strickland work ethic.  In short, I'd pay to see both of them in a Broadway show.  (OK, I've seen Miss Hilty twice before already!)  If this show works, both ladies are going to make it huge!



But the crux of the show - the making of a Broadway musical about Marilyn Monroe - is what will keep me coming back.  And so far so good.  The songs from "the show" are great.  How can you not squeal with delight (yes, squeal) at the Damn Yankees meets Playboy Channel choreography that matches the naughty lyrics (Hilty coos, "Hot dogs!" to erotically positioned baseball bats) of "The National Pastime."?  (Choreography by Joshua Bergasse) And that call back number - WOW!!!  When does the Cast Recording come out?  Of course, with Shaiman and Wittman providing the score, I'm not surprised - so far the songs have the fun and heart of Hairspray and the adult sophistication of Catch Me If You Can.

Michael Mayer directed a superb pilot here - the man knows how to show us his world and his city - and the Chicago-esque staging of the numbers is a brilliant twist on a recognizable theme.  Showing us "The National Pastime" number as it is being staged and flipping seamlessly into what it will look like as a finished product is just plain awesome.  Can't you just tell "the creatives" were visualizing opening night as they watched.  And what a great way to show us what the girls are thinking about when they audition!  Teresa Rebeck has provided a fast-paced, universally relatable script and characters that we can all recognize, Broadway fan or not.  And so far, the "common folk" drama - overbearing parents, an impending divorce, a desired adoption - doesn't feel shoe horned in, but rather natural - even show people have real lives, too.

I know they are trying to sell the whole ship with the pilot, but here are a few things I hope they work on in coming episodes:

  • Slow the pace down just a smidge.  Let us savor the drama and fun.
  • Now that the groundwork has been laid, lay off the cavalcade of stereotypes.  They get boring very fast.
  • Be super careful of interpolating pop songs into this show.  Singing them at auditions makes sense.  Breaking out into a Madonna tune mid-rehearsal not so much.  In fact, the single moment in the pilot that rang completely false to me was when the characters were singing their callback song "Let Me Be Your Star," as the dressed and arrived at the studio.  They weren't practicing it, they were performing it.  The show is ABOUT a making a musical, not an actual musical, right?  Save the song and dance for the rehearsal hall, the workshop and the performance.  You'll keep more viewers.  I'd bet a week's take from The Book of Mormon on it!
  • And more chorus boys and girls please.  Sign Curtis Holbrook and Spencer Liff to contracts!




I hope as the show continues, it does as the pilot does: show us the whole process of putting up a show.  I love that we've seen auditions and the start of callbacks for Marilyn.  It'll be cool to see other roles being cast.  It was great to see a director's audition (though it seems more like it was a choreography audition), even for a potential workshop.  It'll be interesting to see a workshop come together, backer's auditions, re-casting, rehearsals, etc.  I just hope that they don't short change us on any of the process.  This could be our only chance to see this on TV!  So, writers, maybe slow things down just a tad.

Early in the episode, Messing's character laments that her song has gone viral.  "I hate everyone who writes theatre blogs! Hate! Hate! Hate!" she bellows.  She goes on to say they/we rush to judgment without seeing a finished product (I, too, loathe those 1st preview reviewers that don't bother to follow up by seeing the same show after it opens!).  Well, I hope she wouldn't hate this blogger too much.  The pilot is great - not perfect.  But I won't judge the whole series just yet.  I'll watch a few more episodes and get back to you with some more thoughts.  Will Smash be a smash?  So far so good!

(Smash trivia answer:  The show was Three on a Match and it ran 82 performances.)

Photos from NBC.com

Jeff
3. 163

Monday, February 6, 2012

7 Reasons Why SMASH Might Not Be One


PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO VOTE IN THIS MONTH'S POLL 
AND IN ROUND 2 OF "HOT/HOTTER".  THANK YOU.


Caution: This blog contains plot spoilers from the premiere episode of Smash.
This is NOT a review of NBC's Smash, though I will be posting one of those tomorrow.  Instead this is intended to be a reality check for all of us (myself included) about its chances for success beyond the first episode.



Here are several reasons why Smash could end up not being one:

The Subject Matter and the Ratings:  Despite the pleas of the producers of Smash, who insist that there is plenty of soapy fun for non-Broadway fans to enjoy in this drama - family acceptance issues, troubles with adoption, divorce entanglements are but three touched upon in the pilot, the show is all about putting on a Broadway musical from idea to opening night.  Will there really be a balance?  Ratings are what keep shows on.  Can a musical about a musical keep up ratings?  One need only remember the yearly "hold-your-breath" ritual after the Tonys to see if the ratings are enough to warrant a TV telecast next season.  Arguably the most important night in commercial theatre, one would expect that the Tonys would draw the most ardent theatre fans to the tube.  The most recent editions of the Tonys have averaged right around 7 million, with the trend inching downward overall, and considerably down over the past 10 years.  If even just the most ardent theatre fans tune in weekly, is 7 million enough to keep it going?  Maybe.  It is in a good spot, 10PM Mondays.  But will Dancing with the Stars fans change the channel (surely they are a large part of Smash's target audience) to watch the show, or stick with Castle?




Too Broadway "insider"-y:  While theatre fans will lap up references to Michael Riedel, Spider-man and Kristin Chenoweth, and enjoy watching Broadway stars out act their TV counterparts, will the rest of the audience get it?  I mean, it took almost the entire pilot to reveal what it means to be "light."  And that was the very definition of anti-climax.  And how long will it still be fun for even theatre fans to play "spot your favorite chorus boys and girls in bit parts" or count the number of show posters in the background versus the shows you've seen or done?  (Love me some Curtis Holbrook and Spencer Liff, but I'll be very disappointed if this is the last we see of them.)  Won't the majority of the audience think Debra Messing is being a bitch when she complains that musicals are only revivals or movies made into musicals?  Only theatre people will get that that is a problem, not a good quality.  Will America understand why the director is insulted over having to audition himself? And will they recognize that real auditions don't include lascivious remarks from judges or nasty barbs from anyone with a British accent?  Will the simple "thank you very much" and very private callback phone call be dramatic enough in this Idol age?  And will the notoriously snobby Broadway fan base be willing to love Karen as much as they love Ivy even though Karen is not played by a Broadway "star"?

The Subject Matter of the Subject Matter: The coveted 18-49 demographic, especially the even more coveted lower end of the scale is going to be a problem.  The show itself rather cheekily addresses this issue: Debra Messing to "son": "When you hear 'Marilyn', what do you think?"  Son: "Baltimore.  Baltimore, Maryland."  Messing: "No, not the place, the person..." Son: "Oh! Marilyn Manson."  Sure she's an icon and really perfect for a decent musical treatment, but will Marilyn Monroe bring any of the young ones to the screen?


The Songs: With the exception of about 8 bars of "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" which opens the show, and the HEAVILY advertised "Beautiful" (beautifully sung by Katharine McPhee), every song in the pilot is from the show they are building.  It makes sense if we are watching a how to make a musical musical.  But who, besides theatre geeks like us, will find that to be enough?  Will there be more pop hits sprinkled throughout?  Will it make sense?  I turn to my brother-in-law, who dismissed Smash after the "National Pastime" number:  "No one wants to watch Broadway dance numbers every week, especially to songs we don't know.  I can live with the 'bursting into song' thing, but unless they do songs I know and dance like in music videos, it isn't my thing."  My sister, who actually enjoys live theatre said, "The part of Smash I liked least was when they were at home singing the song that was eventually their call back number.  If this is supposed to be a soap opera about theatre, leave the singing for the audition room, rehearsal hall and when they fantasize about the finished product - which really helps you see and understand what the actors think about when they are singing and helps you see how it goes from rehearsal to what you see on stage.  Still, Broadway people work very hard, but their lives aren't actually musicals.  Show them some respect!"

The inevitable and completely inappropriate comparison to Glee Even theatre people are doing this and there is no comparison between the two after they characters sing and dance, which is their only comparison point.  They are different in every other way.  One, Glee is a show aimed at younger people - tweens and high schoolers.  We watch because we crave having lives where we can rule the school with a flashy dance move and a thrilling vibrato.  Two, Glee uses (mostly) pre-existing tunes (notice how fast they dropped the "let's write our own stuff."  Three, Glee only flirts with reality.  Everything else is a hyper-reality of extremes and emotional mood swings - a great way to let the kids see how silly it is without actually saying their real-life shenanigans are bullshit that they will laugh about when they grow up.  These are but three things that Glee is, and Smash isn't.  Unfortunately, there will be camps for both sides, once the first few episodes air of Smash.  I say like or hate one or the other or both.  They are two completely different shows.


The Turn-Off: Smash plays the Broadway stereotypes to the hilt.  Maybe this is just a gateway to get people hooked... let them think Broadway really is what the stereotypes are, and then dazzle them with the real dirt.  I hope that's the case.  But let's run through the stereotypes in the pilot: the gay composer and his fag hag partner in crime, the fawning assistant who works his boss like a puppet, the parents from the Midwest, who are "going along with this acting 'thing' that they know is 'just a phase,'" the chorus girl who wants to be a star, the casting couch with horny director getting a woody for the new girl, the new girl who is naive, but not really, the sexually ambiguous director who talks straight and beds the chorus girls, but has clearly had something in the past with the composer, the almost too supportive boyfriend, the realistic theatre widow husband... of course, stereotypes are just that because there is some truth to them.  Somehow, I expected more... or do I mean less?

Life Expectancy:  Barring a huge ratings mishap, NBC has so much invested in this series, I'll be surprised if they don't show the whole thing.  But is this a show meant to have more than one season?  If it is a hit, will it take years to get "Marilyn" to the "stage"?  Or will each season be a new musical?  Maybe this is a case for a telenovela style show.  13 episodes and that is it.  On the other hand, I'd hate to grow to love these people and never see them again... you know?

TOMORROW: My review of Smash.  Why I hope it will be a huge one!


Photos from NBC.

Jeff
3.162
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...