In the past, I've run into trouble when my passions have intersected. Obviously, I'm obsessed with musical theater, but I do have a few other overriding interests in life. I'm a complete Monty Python fanatic, for instance, and was initially thrilled to hear about Spamalot, only to be significantly disappointed in the actual quality of the show.
So, it was with a measured sense of caution that I approached The Eugene O'Neill Theater Center in Waterford, Conn. this past Saturday for a staged reading of the musical version of Tales of the City. I've been an ardent fan of Armistead Maupin's series of books back from the early '80s, and have pored through them numerous times since then. As with any musical from a beloved source, the creators of the Tales musical have quite a formidable task ahead of them.
Fortunately, those creators are themselves formidable in their own right, including Tony-winning librettist Jeff Whitty and director Jason Moore, both Avenue Q alums. The score is by some musical-theater newcomers: Scissor Sisters front man Jake Shears and keyboardist John Garden. In addition, the reading took place under the auspices of the National Musical Theater Conference which has seen quite a few notable shows emerge from its workshop process, including Nine, Violet, In the Heights, The Wild Party (Lippa), The Bubbly Black Girl Sheds Her Chameleon Skin, [title of show], The Story of My Life, and the aforementioned Avenue Q.
Obviously, Tales the musical is still under development, but I found much to enjoy and appreciate in the O'Neill's admittedly low-key production. The show's key asset thus far is Whitty's nimble book, which ably compresses the Tales story and cleverly intermingles its sprawling cast of characters. Whitty and director Moore also display sharp instincts for character parallels and song placement.
Would that the songs themselves were worthy of the setup that Whitty's book provides. So far, they're not, although there are some really terrific pieces in the second act. On the whole, there are currently too many bland, undifferentiated ballads, including "Don't Rush the Seasons," between Anna Madrigal (played here by the marvelous Candy Buckey) and Mona (the spitfire Mary Birdsong). The uptempo numbers are a bit more distinct and memorable, including "Welcome Home," a number for the society sissies that Michael (Christopher J. Hanke) and Jon (Josh Breckenridge) encounter at a party, as well as the act one finale, in which the characters exhort Mary Ann not to go back to Cleveland.
Most of the show comes from the first Tales book, but there are a few elements from the second book, More Tales of the City, including the pivotal character Mother Mucca (who gets the show-stoppingly profane number "Ride 'Em Hard," performed here with great gusto by Kristine Zbornik), as well as Michael's iconic "Letter to Mama," which receives a stirring rendition here from Chris Hanke.
With such a large number of important characters to flesh out, it seems inevitable that at this point in the show's development there would be some holes. In particular need of beefing up are Michael and Brian Hawkins (played here by my old friend Steve Kazee, showing a great deal more charisma and heart than in certain recent outings). This is especially true in the second act, which spends a bit too much time on the whole Norman Neal Williams plot. (Does NNW really need a song?) But here's the challenge that lies before Whitty, Moore, and their colleagues: the show is already running at about three hours. How can they cut the show down but solidify the story at the same time? Well, there are at least three or four boring ballads that could go: that would save at least 15 minutes right there.
But, from where I sit, the challenge of getting the show down to a manageable length while creating stronger characterizations is eminently surmountable. I'm not so sure about the score. It's not clear that Shears and Garden are really up to the task. It makes me wish that Moore and Whitty had gone with composer/lyricists with a bit more MT experience. Of course, it's quite possible that the barn at the O'Neill wasn't the ideal place to experience the score; although I was in the second row, I found myself straining at times to understand the lyrics because of the acoustics.
On the whole, Tales of the City shows great promise, and is already a fitting tribute to its beloved source material. As the show evolves, it would be great if it could hold on to as many members as possible of the O'Neill cast, which comprised an exceptional roster of pros, including the above-named performers as well as Betsy Wolfe (Mary Ann Singleton), Jeffrey Carlson (Beauchamp Day), and Jose Llana (various parts). Whatever the future of the show, rest assured that I'll be there whenever I can to witness and document its development.
Well, that's encouraging! Hurrah for them. This is definitely one of those "You're going to do *what*?" kind of shows, so it sounds as if the creators are pretty fearless. If it's got legs, I'll definitely try to catch it in its next incarnation.
Posted by: Scot Colford | July 13, 2009 at 08:36 PM
For the record, neither The Story of My Life nor [title of show] was developed at the NMTC--they were both there under the auspices of the Cabaret Conference, which would be better titled "The Conference of Whatever Pet Projects Michael Bush Is Ruining at the Moment."
Posted by: Seth Christenfeld | July 14, 2009 at 01:02 AM
The cast was terrific, and terrifically talented. I cried or teared up at all the right moments -- Michael's "Letter to Moma" and Didi's song to her dying father, Edward Halcyon (and, probably, if I handn't, that would be a major problem w/the show).
I especially liked Candy Buckley as Anna Madrigal -- she nailed it.
I wanted more from the MaryAnne character -- it wasn't really clear why she, at the end of Act 1, decided to stay in SF.
I love the ballads, although I think there were some (and I didn't take good notes) that slowed things down more than they needed to be. I liked "Don't Rush the Seasons."
I thought they pulled together all the characters and plot lines quite well, but I knew the story. I'm not sure it would work for those who weren't already familiar w/Tales. Too many characters, too many story lines, not enough character development.
I would say, yes, get rid of the child pornographer, at least as the character is currently envisioned.
As opposed to Chris, I liked the score more than the story. I'd like to seem them make changes that deepen relationships among the main characters, and I think I said that already.
OK, yes, I was influenced by the fact that Armistead Mauping was there, as was Jake Shears, and we all ended up at the on-campus bar afterward - not that I talked to either of them, oh well.
It was a wonderful evening. I was moved by the show, and aware that it still needs some work.
-- Steve
Posted by: stmigrliwe | July 14, 2009 at 04:21 PM
OK, ok, for those who went w/me -- yes, I have a thing for Jose Llana.
Get over it!
-- Steve
Posted by: stmigrliwe | July 14, 2009 at 04:22 PM
Get in line, Mary. I've had my eye on Jose since King & I in 1996. Flower Drum Song and Spelling Bee only cemented our destiny.
Posted by: ccaggiano | July 14, 2009 at 04:29 PM
Steve, I think we agree on the important stuff: the characters and relationships need clarifying, and the show needs to be cut down. But, as I said, I think that's definitely doable given the current state of the show. Perhaps the score will grow on me. But I'm really hoping that they can punch up the first act a bit, and get rid of some of the superfluous ballads.
Posted by: ccaggiano | July 14, 2009 at 04:31 PM
I guess you're first, but I'll fight you for the honor.
-- Steve
Posted by: stmigrliwe | July 14, 2009 at 05:15 PM
Interesting report - Tales of the City is a tricky project, although, yeah, it does feel very musical in some ways...
Sad to hear that the Michael stuff is suffering, though it's slightly inevitable with the material (certainly in the first 3 books, Michael tends to not have any really major plot stuff going on - Maryanne tends to play girl-detective for most of the big plot stuff for the first 3 books, which leaves Michael off on the side either dropping advice, or moping about his on again/off again romantic life - ironically for one of the big breakthrough gay books, a lot of the gay sensibility tends to be expressed still through a female lead!)
As for whether Norman Neil Williams needs a song... well, no he doesn't (hell, a lot of musical writers could be profitably pointed towards South Pacific and Luther Billis, or West Side story and Doc - both reasonably major characters in the plots of those shows, and neither of them getting songs) but I can imagine a Jud-Fry-"Lonely Room" type number for him . And it's good thematically for a musical about an accepting community (which is what Barbary Lane is) to demonstrate musically the one character who is not accepted in that community (or who does not want to fit into that community). Having said that, you'll still find people who argue Lonely Room has no room in Oklahoma either...
Posted by: simon | July 20, 2009 at 05:30 PM
Is there any truth to the rumor that there is no Dorothea in the musical? I hope not--I loved her and the story
Posted by: RoryGeorge | May 24, 2011 at 07:28 PM
It's been a few years, but I don't recall D'orothea being in the musical. They have a lot of ground to cover in a few hours, and I think some people and events had to get cut.
Posted by: ccaggiano | May 25, 2011 at 12:24 PM
For once Chris, I am fortunate in finally being able to express my feelings on a finished product before you do! I hope I don't give too much away but I must say I just have the urge to share my thoughts (I did not take notes but let’s see what magic I can conjure up).
Firstly, the cast was very talented. I was mostly impressed with Wesley Taylor (Michael Tolliver) who gave the best performance of the night, at least from where I was standing. His performance was refreshing, real, and gave so much flavor and humor to the show. Mary Birdsong (Mona Ramsel) and Diane J. Findlay (Mother Mucca) also gave rousing performances. I must say that even though I did like Judy Kaye as Anna Madrigal, I felt like something was missing. She seemed unintentionally bland and monotonous at times, though she did give a few wonderful performances with some of her songs.
This may not be on track with a review but I swear Kristin Chenowith and Laura Bell Bundy (Legally Blonde) are perfect for two parts in this show. I was watching and couldn’t help but see Chenowith as the bosses daughter and Bundy as Mary Ann.
As for the score, it still needs work. Some numbers were absolutely wonderful. I do not have song names but the number where Michael writes to his mother is possibly the song that has the most weight to it and is extremely emotional. The upbeat songs definitely had its place in this show and were generally funny. A few of the slower songs were unmemorable and could possibly be cut (maybe one or two).
It lacks characterization. I felt a lack of progression in the first act because I felt the entire act was dedicated to revealing who these characters are, reminding me of Cats to a certain extent. Coming from someone who is unfamiliar with the books, I started to get slowly lost in the first act with what was happening because a concise story wasn’t yet apparent. It felt slow, but once the second act started, the real progression started. I think some of this needs to be cut. For instance in the second act we are revealed that a character has child pornography. It was so not needed, and I feel maybe half the audience didn’t get what was happening until a little later. Also, the "previewing" of the characters that seems to be the entire first act needs to be cut. It needs way more progression.
The show is definitely funny, but some of the jokes I feel will only be understood by people who live in the Bay Area. If this goes to New York, some of the jokes are going to have to be rewritten because I don’t think many people in New York know that Marin is a boring city, and therefore, won’t get the joke about it. I must say though I was laughing quite often at the multitude of jokes, funny songs, dancing, and half naked men and brief interactions with a topless woman.
I think the one of the best things they did was the beginning of the show. Lights went down, and then disco balls were spinning. It set such a fun mood for what we were to expect.
The set, though extremely confined and somewhat dizzying with its multitude of stairs cramped in a small area, was a smart little concept. We've all seen panels moving in shows, but something I was not too familiar with was panels that enacted as shutters, opening if a character walked behind it. These panels acted both as perfect walls when needed, and also allowed us to see through them, allowing more movement of the characters.
The choreography was fun, but I felt some of it was unnecessary. I also witnessed a recurring theme of when some of the numbers ended; everyone would break out in random dancing while the set was changing or if they were going off stage. I felt it was obvious filler for a brief 7 seconds while something changed. I guess I just prefer blackouts.
The lighting really enhanced much of what was going on. In one of my favorite numbers, the lighting danced with the actors, making it even more enjoyable to watch.
All in all I think this is a good musical. Technically, I think its sound for a smaller sized production, but I still feel act one needs some work and some of the score needs a little work. My only hope is that if this makes it to Broadway, Wesley Taylor follows it because I felt his performance is what really sealed the deal for me on this musical. I wish you could come see it Chris, I think it’s worth the trip out here personally.
Sorry if I revealed too much and that it is very long.
Posted by: -Rich | June 30, 2011 at 03:49 AM
I can't wait to hear what you have to say about this show if you get the chance to see it.
I agree with much of what Rich said above.
I am a huge fan of the books, and I so badly wanted to love the show, but I didn't. I liked it a lot, but it definitely could use more work.
For me, Mary Birdsong really stole the show. She was fantastic in every scene she was in. Her vocal performance was amazing. She really put a lot of emotion into every song she sang. Her overall embodiment of Mona was spot on.
Wesley Taylor was perfect as Mouse. His performance of "Dear Mama" was top notch and probably one of the most emotional moments I've seen in a show.
I agree with Rich about Judy Kaye. She was good, but it seemed like something was missing. But then again, I wasn't completely drawn to Olympia Dukakis as Mrs. Madrigal in the miniseries either. I feel that Mrs. Madrigal is the sort of character that can really only live in your head since she reads almost as a sort of magical character.
Some of the other characters just weren't developed enough, like Brian and Norman Neal Williams.
I agree completely with Rich about Chenoweth as DeDe Halcyon. Kathleen Elizabeth Monteleone did a great job portraying her though.
As far as the music, I think a lot of it fell flat. Many of the ballads simply didn't carry the audience on an emotional journey. They were nice, but certainly didn't make that sort of connection. Most of them have potential, and often come close to soaring, but don't quite make it off the ground. Apart from "Dear Mama," the only other songs that I thought really stood out were "Paper Faces" and "Seeds & Stems." "Paper Faces" was a great number, with a great staging, and one of the only songs that really demonstrated a strong character development. You can see a short performance of it at http://youtu.be/i3KJYxk6N7U. It's not a great quality since it was recorded outdoors at San Francisco Pride. You can also hear "Seeds & Stems" at http://youtu.be/2BniEDQTud4, recorded by Mary Birdsong. As for many of the upbeat songs, they were fun, but most of them didn't have that hook that really sticks in your head afterward. "Nobody's City But My Own," which is the opening number is good, but I didn't really get as into it until I saw the show for a second time. You can see "Love Comes Running," also performed at SF Pride, here http://youtu.be/ZfrLRb8Qc9g. It's one that I thought was cute.
As far as the story goes, I think it would be difficult for someone who isn't familiar with the books to really follow what is going on. Also, as Rich mentioned, many of the jokes just wouldn't make sense outside of San Francisco. So some of it wouldn't make sense to a Broadway audience. But then again, the SF-centric nature of it is what makes Tales of the City, you know, Tales of the City to begin with.
I loved the set. Some reviews I've read didn't like it because it wasn't SF enough since it didn't feature of the Golden Gate Bridge or Victorian houses, but I think all that is way too cliche, especially for a San Francisco audience. The elaborate stairways definitely give that SF-vibe and really is true to life.
Overall, I think the musical is good. It is very enjoyable and fun. And for any Tales of the City fan, I agree with Rich that it's worth the trip to see.
Posted by: Matt | June 30, 2011 at 04:22 PM
Rich: Thanks for the report. It sounds like a lot of the problems I noticed when I saw the show still remain. By all accounts, they appear to be trying to tell too much of the story and include too many of the characters. It's understandable, but makes the story too complicated for a 2.5 hour show.
Posted by: ccaggiano | July 02, 2011 at 10:29 AM
Matt: I too am a huge fan of the books, which is why I went to see the show at the O'Neill. As I said above, It seems as though a lot of the problems I saw with the show still remain, including the thin characterizations and the boring ballads. If the show makes it to New York, I hope they get a chance to tighten it up.
Posted by: ccaggiano | July 02, 2011 at 10:33 AM
And it was 3 hours...forgot to mention that
Posted by: -Rich | July 02, 2011 at 06:24 PM
That's how long it was when I saw it. Apparently they haven't had a chance to trim things yet.
Posted by: ccaggiano | July 02, 2011 at 07:42 PM
I wonder how much they included then trimmed since the time you saw it and the time I saw it. My friends who saw it during the previews in May said it was 3.5 hours and the reports I read elsewhere said the same. I don't know if they cut anything or just really tightened things up. I hope they do pull it together because some of the characters and performances are truly fantastic.
Posted by: Matt | July 05, 2011 at 11:59 PM