Everything I Know I Learned From Musicals

The 2011 Tony Award Winners - My Take

 I haven't watched the Tony Awards yet. I know that sounds strange, but I had a concert to attend last night, and earlier this year I disconnected my TiVo and got rid of cable, and I haven't had the desire nor the ambition to do whatever it is I need to do to get my TV up and running without cable. Lately, I've been perfectly content with my DVD collection and Netflix.

Of course, as soon as I got home, I fired up my computer to see who won what. Here's a breakdown of how many awards each musical production won:

The Book of Mormon: 9
Anything Goes: 3
Catch Me If You Can: 1
How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying: 1
Priscilla Queen of the Desert: 1

Before I launch into my take on the individual winners, I just want to give a shout out to whoever designed the logo/poster/Playbill cover for this year's awards. I guess it wouldn't seem so remarkable if last year's poster hadn't been so heinous. Anyway, here are the winners:

Best Musical
*The Book of Mormon
Catch Me If You Can 
The Scottsboro Boys 
Sister Act
My Take: Pretty much as expected, and well-deserved. Catch Me If You Can and Sister Act were inept and lackluster, and there was no way the Tony was going to go to The Scottsboro Boys. Remember, the Tonys are about marketing, not artistic quality, and you can't market a closed show.

Best Revival of a Musical
*Anything Goes
How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying
My Take: You know, the more I think about it, the more I like the new How to Succeed more than the current Anything Goes. Both were immensely enjoyable to sit through, but I find that How to Succeed has lingered with me longer. I sort of have to actively think about Anything Goes to recall specific things about the production. So, on the whole, I would rather the Tony had gone to How to Succeed.

Best Actor in a Musical
*Norbert Leo Butz, Catch Me If You Can
Josh Gad, The Book of Mormon
Joshua Henry, The Scottsboro Boys
Andrew Rannells, The Book of Mormon
Tony Sheldon, Priscilla Queen of the Desert
My Take: Josh Gad and Andrew Rannells appear to have split the Book of Mormon vote, giving previous winner Butz a chance to pick up his second Tony. Don't get me wrong: Butz is great, in this show as well as in everything he does. But I kinda would have rather seen the award go to Rannells, or Gad, who both give impeccable comic performances. Why couldn't Gad and Rannells have gotten a single nomination, like those oh-so-adorable and three young men who undeservedly won a three-way Tony a few years back for Billy Elliot? Yeah, I know, the kids were all playing the same part. But Emily Skinner and Alice Ripley weren't playing the same part in Side Show, and they got a tandem nomination. I'm only half serious here, but honestly, if the Tonys can make the rules up as they go along, why can't I speculate with reckless abandon?  

Best Actress in a Musical
*Sutton Foster, Anything Goes
Beth Leavel, Baby It's You!
Patina Miller, Sister Act
Donna Murphy, The People in the Picture
My Take: Just as it should be. Sutton Foster is a gift to musical comedy. Both Beth Leavel and Donna Murphy are remarkable performers, but they're really the only reasons to see the otherwise execrable shows that they are unfortunately appearing in. Patina Miller is a very talented newcomer, and I wish her well, but I wasn't all that thrilled with her performance in Sister Act, nor indeed with the show itself. Sister Act was very deservedly shut out in every category.

Best Featured Actress in a Musical
Laura Benanti, Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown
Tammy Blanchard, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying
Victoria Clark, Sister Act
*Nikki M. James, The Book of Mormon
Patti LuPone, Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown
My Take: Word on the street had Laura Benanti winning for a second time. But Women on the Verge appears to have left far too bitter an aftertaste for many of the Tony voters. (Not to mention me.) Plus, Nikki James, although she is wonderful in her role, clearly benefited from the Book of Mormon behemoth. I would love to have seen the award go to Tammy Blanchard, who does a wonderful job of making Hedy Larue her own.

Best Featured Actor in a Musical
Colman Domingo, The Scottsboro Boys
Adam Godley, Anything Goes
*John Larroquette, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying
Forrest McClendon, The Scottsboro Boys
Rory O'Malley, The Book of Mormon
My Take: A genuine surprise. The smart money was on Rory O'Malley, who's an absolute stitch as the closeted gay Mormon. (Must...resist...redundancy reference...) Godley didn't do much for me in Anything Goes. And for Domingo and McClendon, well, nomination is its own reward. Larroquette was terrific as Bigley, evincing much of the smart comic timing that won him so many Emmy Awards. I would have given the award to John McMartin in Anything Goes, but he wasn't nominated. So I guess I'm pretty happy it went to Larroquette.

Best Book of a Musical
Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson, Alex Timbers
*The Book of Mormon Trey Parker, Robert Lopez and Matt Stone
The Scottsboro Boys, David Thompson
Sister Act, Cheri Steinkellner, Bill Steinkellner and Douglas Carter Beane
My Take: Bingo. Jackpot. Straight Across. Bloody Bloody and Scottsboro were both worthy contenders, but clearly this award was going to go to the funniest book to hit Broadway in many a season. And as for Sister Act, well, the less said the better, really.

Best Costume Design of a Musical
*Tim Chappel & Lizzy Gardiner, Priscilla Queen of the Desert
Martin Pakledinaz, Anything Goes
Ann Roth, The Book of Mormon
Catherine Zuber, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying
My Take: PUH-LEEZ. Predictable and disappointing. The Tony voters appear to have caught on to the American mania for more, More, MORE! Sure the costumes for Priscilla are lavish, gaudy, expensive, and over-the-top. But are they good? I kinda wish the Tony voters had gone with the Mormon momentum and given the award to Roth. At least her costumes were genuinely witty.

Best Direction of a Musical
Rob Ashford, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying
Kathleen Marshall, Anything Goes
*Casey Nicholaw and Trey Parker, The Book of Mormon
Susan Stroman, The Scottsboro Boys
My Take: I'm thrilled to see Nicholaw get some much deserved love. My admiration for his work has only grown over time. The man really knows how to dress a stage, shape comic performances, and get the show running at a jaunty pace. I'm looking forward to seeing his career progress, both as a director and a choreographer.

Best Choreography
Rob Ashford, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying
*Kathleen Marshall, Anything Goes
Casey Nicholaw, The Book of Mormon
Susan Stroman, The Scottsboro Boys
My take: I would love to have seen this one go to Nicholaw, but really any of these fine people were deserving of this award. And Marshall's work on Anything Goes is outstanding, so it's really hard for me to gripe here.

Best Original Score
*The Book of Mormon, Music & Lyrics: Trey Parker, Robert Lopez and Matt Stone
The Scottsboro Boys, Music & Lyrics: John Kander and Fred Ebb
Sister Act, Music: Alan Menken, Lyrics: Glenn Slater
Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown, Music & Lyrics: David Yazbek
My take: My sentimental side (and, yes, I do have one) was sort of hoping this would go to Kander and Ebb for their fine work on Scottsboro Boys. But I genuinely enjoy the score to Book of Mormon, and find new things to love in it every time I listen to the recording. Sister Act and Women on the Verge were merely placeholders this year, although the more I listen to the Women on the Verge CD, the more begrudgingly fond I become of certain numbers (especially "Island" and "Lovesick").

Best Lighting Design of a Musical - *Brian MacDevitt, The Book of Mormon
Best Scenic Design of a Musical - *Scott Pask, The Book of Mormon
Best Sound Design of a Musical - *Brian Ronan, The Book of Mormon
Best Orchestrations - *Larry Hochman and Stephen Oremus, The Book of Mormon
My take: Clearly, this year we saw the Tony momentum go to Book of Mormon. Much as The Producers got more Tonys than it deserved simply because the Tony voters wanted to set a record, so too Book of Mormon won in more categories than was probably warranted because the Tony voters wanted to congratulate themselves on finally having another smash hit on the boards. So Best Lighting? Best Scenic Design? Best Orchestrations? These fine upstanding professionals can, for the most part, thank the Book of Mormon juggernaut for their coveted little trophies.

The Tony Awards - Why I Didn't Care This Year

I'm sure that I don't have to tell you that the Tony Awards were presented on Sunday night. I had a concert that night (see post below), so I had to watch the proceedings on TiVo delay. But truth be told, it really didn't matter to me because this season was so lackluster with respect to new musicals. Sure, there were shows that tried to do new things, particularly Fela, American Idiot, and Come Fly Away. But none of them really succeeded, in my humble estimation. (Click on the links above for my reviews of each production.)

So it really wasn't a surprise when Memphis won Best Musical. I would have preferred that Fela win, simply because it was more ambitious. I thought the first act of Memphis was super slick, but the second act descended into predictability and essentially veered off into Hairspray country. (Click on the link above for my full review.) Why did Memphis win? Simple: the critics were dumped from the voting ranks of the Tonys and the remaining voters went for the relatively safe choice. Memphis won not because it's very good (it isn't) but rather because it's more likely to be successful on the road.

So, Memphis has now joined the ranks of Raisin, Redhead, Hallelujah Baby, The Mystery of Edwin Drood, Big River, Sunset Boulevard, Fosse, Applause, and Jerome Robbins' Broadway: Big winners in a down year. Will Memphis virtually disappear from circulation as most of the above-listed shows have? Time will tell. 

The Tony Awards broadcast was rather unremarkable, although lots of people seemed to think that Sean Hayes knocked one out of the park as host. I thought he was fine, but he paled in comparison to the charm, ease, and spark that Neil Patrick Harris brought to last year's telecast.

One notable trend this year was Broadway congratulating itself on being able to attract A-list Hollywood stars. Did Scarlett Johansson, Denzel Washington, and Catherine Zeta-Jones genuinely deserve their Tony Awards? I saw neither A View From the Bridge nor Fences, so I'm in no position to judge there. (I concentrated almost exclusively on musicals this season.) But I did see A Little Night Music, and can honestly say no, I don't think she deserved it. (Click on the link for my review.) I would have been happy to see the award go to Kate Baldwin (Finian's Rainbow), Montego Glover (Memphis), or Christiane Noll (Ragtime). I think this is another case of the skewing effect of having producers, presenters, and other business types vote for the awards. Rewarding stars for coming to Broadway means more stars come to Broadway. And in the current environment in which plays and musicals are increasingly reliant on marquee names above the title, that's a very important business proposition.

Of course, it has absolutely nothing to do with merit. Or art.

The New iBroadway iPhone App

OK, so you've finally broken down and gotten yourself one of those iPhone things, and you're wondering what all the fuss has been about. Sure, it's cool to look at. But what does the iPhone offer for the Broadway aficionado?

Well, you're in luck, my friend. Because now your iPhone can not only allow you to locate the nearest Starbucks and make a video of your dog chasing his tail, it can also offer you a sleek new portal to the world of New York theater and beyond. Check out the new iBroadway app. It's got a number of really cool features, including show listings, ticket information, discounts, photos, and videos. 

It also has links to a number of respected theater blogs, including Aaron Riccio's That Sounds Cool, Jan Simpson's Broadway & Me, and...oh, wait...could that be *my* blog listed there as well? (Yeah, I know. Sometimes I'm just unbearable...) Yes, all the build-up was simply to inform you that my blog feed is part of the new iBroadway app, and I'm really interested to see how this thing develops. It's off to a genuinely solid start. It's got some really great info, and, heck, it's free. So, why don't you sidle on over to iTunes when you get a sec and check it out. And let me know what you think.

On a more somber note, one of the other blog feeds included in the app is that of the late Patrick Lee of Just Shows to Go You. On the same day that I heard the iBroadway app was released, I also heard that Patrick had passed away suddenly last week at the age of 51. It was rather surreal to see Patrick's logo and feed included within the new app. Patrick's last post was only about a week ago. I'm sure that my readers join me in keeping Patrick's family and friends in their thoughts. 

Should Bloggers Review Previews?

My esteemed blogging colleague Esther at Gratuitous Violins has an insightful post today about bloggers reviewing shows before opening night. Her post is in response to an article in on British news site The Guardian about British producer Michael Condron. At the end of the article, Condron rails against theater bloggers:

His single flash of anger is aimed at the bloggers who, in defiance of theatrical convention that comment is embargoed until press night, review a play during its previews. "It's almost invariably reactionary responses. They're the modern equivalent of the lot that used to boo the plays in the 50s and 60s. I think they're ghastly.

Here's an irony: Codron actually misuses the word "reactionary," under the false supposition that it means "in reaction to." In fact, it means "opposing political or social change." And that is, in fact, what Codron himself is doing. Well, tu quoque, Mr. Codron.

You're fighting a losing battle, dude. ("It's a new world, Golde. A new world...") The moldy Old Guard simply don't understand the new media. They rail against change, anything that doesn't fit in with their fixed ideas about how theater should operate, and in the process they fail to take advantage of potential marketing opportunities. One of the reasons that Next to Normal recently turned a profit is that the marketing team was very savvy about social media, Twitter in particular, upon which it has amassed more than one million followers. That's right, one million. How many Twitter followers did you manage to scrape up for Losing Louie, Mr. Codron?

When I get press tickets, I abide by embargoes. It's only fair. But when I pay for my ticket, I'll say what I want, where I want, when I want. And no reactionary septuagenarian is going to stop me.

Avenue Q at the New World Stages

When Avenue Q opened last week at its new Off-Broadway home, the New World Stages, a lot of people in the theatrical community were paying close attention. Of course, it's a much-beloved show, and many are simply wishing it well. (Except, perhaps, the producers of Wicked, from whose verdant hands Avenue Q so summarily snatched the Best Musical Tony in 2003.)

But the main point of interest seems to be how well Avenue Q will do financially after making this unusual move. It's not entirely unprecedented for a Broadway show to move Off Broadway, but it's certainly rare. And if Avenue Q succeeds, we can probably expect other small shows to follow suit. There's talk that The 39 Steps will make a similar move after it closes at year's end at the Helen Hayes. Perhaps Next to Normal and Rock of Ages might consider returning to their Off Broadway roots after their respective Broadway stints have run their course.

I've been enamored of Avenue Q ever since I caught one of its Broadway previews back in 2003. I've subsequently seen the show on tour (read my review), and then revisited the Broadway production shortly before it closed (read my review). And, over the weekend, I caught the show once again at its new digs. And I'm happy to say that the show has lost none of its charm upon multiple viewings. Of course, part of the fun for me the last two times is that I saw the show with friends, and got to witness their delighted reactions to the show upon their first viewings. But even when I saw the show solo on tour, I was still caught up in the response of the rest of the audience.

The performance of Avenue Q that I saw over the weekend featured three understudies, indicating that even Off Broadway shows are not immune to the scourge of absenteeism that seems to be sweeping New York theater. Fortunately, the standbys were mostly stellar, particular the charming Jed Resnick as Princeton/Rod and the delightful Ruthie Ann Miles as Christmas Eve.

The more I see Avenue Q, the more I'm struck not just by its wit, but also by its wisdom. Yeah, I know, that sounds pretty pretentious. But there's so much about the show that's just plain smart, from the wistful nostalgia of "I Wish I Could Go Back to College" to the downright Buddhist quality of "For Now." So I wish the show well in its latest incarnation, and strongly recommend that you make your way to 50th Street, between 8th and 9th to catch the show, if you haven't already.

Or even if you have.

Desk Clearing: West Side Spanish, Birdie Dance, Nine Movie, and Ragtime Logo

A number of things have been making me cranky lately. Not sure if it's just my mood, or if these items are genuinely annoying. So, rather than addressing each item separately, I figured I'd just get them all out of the way in one peevish post.

Bye Bye Birdie - The New York Daily News reports that the star of the upcoming Broadway revival of Bye Bye Birdie, Gina Gershon, won't be performing the show's iconic Shriner's Ballet. The article quotes Gershon as saying the dance was cut because it was too "gang rape-y." As other commentators have pointed out, that's never seemed to be a problem before, despite being Tams-Witmark's number-one show for decades. The more likely explanation: Gershon can't handle the dance. If they're so concerned about modern sensibilities, will Gershon be performing the regressive and sexist "An English Teacher"? Will the chorus girls still be fawning and fainting to the salacious sight of Conrad Birdie's gyrating hips? The show is a period piece. If you don't like the period, don't do the piece.
Peeve Factor: 7 out of 10. If you want to see a real pro in action, click here to watch Chita Rivera perform the Shriner's Ballet.

West Side Story - According to the New York Times, the current smash-hit Broadway revival of West Side Story has changed back much of the show's much-touted Spanish to the original English lyrics and text. As you may know, director Arthur Laurents brought in Lin-Manuel Miranda (In the Heights) to translate huge chunks of the show into Spanish. The article quotes Laurents as saying the Spanish was "an experiment." Yeah, a failed experiment. As I've written about in my reviews of the show itself and of the CD, I wasn't a fan of the Spanish text. I found it alienating and thought it robbed two terrific songs ("I Feel Pretty" and "A Boy Like That/I Have a Love") of their humor, pathos, and drama. But I also thought that Miranda's lyrics didn't match the quality of Sondheim's original work.
Peeve Factor: 5 out of 10, mitigated by the fact that they've, for the most part, reverted to the infinitely preferable original words.

"Nine" - The more I hear about Rob Marshall's forthcoming film version of Nine, the less excited I become. First, the delectable Javier Bardem dropped out, replaced by the talented but IMHO considerably less sexy Daniel Day Lewis. Now, according to Playbill, Maury Yeston has provided three new songs for the movie: "Guarda la Luna," "Cinema Italiano," and "Take it All." Which is fine, but to make room, they're cutting at least five of the original songs: "Simple," "Be On Your Own," "Grand Canal," "Nine," "The Bells of St. Sebastian's." Boo and grrr. (For a detailed discussion of the cut and added songs, check out a post by my friend Kevin at Theatre Aficionado at Large.)
Peeve Factor: 9 out of 10. Pun intended. I'm not a knee-jerk purist, but the movie is going to need to be pretty spectacular to make up for the butchering of the score. Of course, the "Sweeney Todd" film involved a tremendous amount of cutting as well, and I raved about that movie in my review. So, the jury's still out, despite my current annoyance.

Ragtime - The press folk for the upcoming Broadway revival of Ragtime have recently been touting the new visual identity for the production. (See left) Apparently, it's the work of some famous Italian illustrator. Whatever, it's washed-out, flat, and unmemorable. Plus, the physical arrangement seems borrowed from the logo to The Secret Garden. Of course, I was also nonplussed by the logos for Hair and A Catered Affair, and impressed by that of Cry-Baby. So there's no necessary connection between the quality of an individual show and that of its marketing materials.
Peeve Factor: 2 out of 10. Like many of you, I'm simply thrilled that Ragtime is getting another chance on Broadway. During its original run, it was overshadowed by The Lion King and hampered by irresponsible -- and now felonious -- producing.

Finian's Rainbow Revival Cast and Logo

The producers of the upcoming Broadway revival of Finian's Rainbow recently announced some initial casting for the show. The lovely and talented Kate Baldwin will reprise the role of Sharon, which she played in the recent Encores concert version. Also returning as the eponymous Finian will be the delightful Jim Norton, Tony winner for The Seafarer. Warren Carlyle, who directed and choreographed the Encores production, will repeat those duties for Broadway.

As for those who won't be returning, the delicious Cheyenne Jackson will likely not be a part of the Broadway Finian's Rainbow cast, owing to a conflicting engagement, which rumor has it will be in London. No announcement yet about who will be taking Jackson's place. Also out is the wonderful Jeremy Bobb as Og, apparently because the Burton Lane estate thought he was too cute for the role. (How's that for a left-handed compliment?) Taking his place as Og will be Christopher Fitzgerald. (I guess he's just cute enough.) Tony winner Chuck Cooper (The Life) will also join the cast in the role of Billboard.

In my review of the Encores version, I said that I was enchanted by the the Burton Lane and E.Y. "Yip" Harburg score, but nonplussed by book, adapted there by David Ives. But I've subsequently read through Harburg's original and Peter Stone's revised versions of the libretto, and found a lot more merit in the show than the Encores presentation reflected. As to whether it will be commercially viable, I have serious doubts. As I said in my review:

It's one thing to wow the "in" crowd at City Center. It's another thing entirely to attract enough of the general public to make a Broadway run profitable. Heck, if frickin' Gypsy with frickin' Patti LuPone can't manage more than 332 performances, what makes producers think that Finian's Rainbow is going to lure the crowds in?

On the plus side, I really like the new logo, pictured above. The image is vibrant and welcoming, and conveys the sense of a classic story with a fresh, modern sensibility. Hopefully, so will the show.

UPDATE: Despite recent reports to the contrary, Variety writes today that Cheyenne Jackson will indeed reprise the role of Woody when Finian's Rainbow hits Broadway this coming season. I had heard that Jackson had a conflicting engagement in London, but it appears that either that gig fell trough, or the producers of Finian's Rainbow were able to entice him away. Either way, it's good news for the show: more than just a pretty face, Jackson is also a terrific performer, and made for a charming foil to Baldwin's winsome Sharon. I would have seen the show again anyway, but this makes the prospect that much more pleasurable.

Critics No Longer Tony Voters

Last night, the Tony Awards management committee announced that the so-called "First Night" critics -- the ones who (in theory) attend and review shows based on opening nights -- will no longer be eligible to vote in the Tony Awards process. The reason, according to a New York Times report, is that "...the committee concluded that it was a conflict of interest for journalists to vote on Tony contenders when they have a platform to champion a show in news and entertainment media."

So, who's left to vote for the Tonys? Producers, theater owners, publicists, actors, writers, designers, and other union and committee members. You know, the people who have absolutely no conflict of interest. As Robert Diamond, editor-in-chief of BroadwayWorld.com, tweeted last night shortly after the announcement, "As if voting for the Tony Awards needed to find a way to make the process even more insular/biased."

The Tony Awards have really never been more than a thin marketing ploy. (When was the last time the season's best musical actually won Best Musical?) However, as Diamond intimates, this decision brings the voting process in the wrong direction. There were only 800 or so people who voted for the Tonys before this decision, and now there will be only about 700, a reduction of about 13%. And one of the worst kept secrets in the industry is that many of those voters don't bother to see all the shows, although they are supposed to before voting in any particular category. Some shows in recent seasons have seen fewer than 1/3 of the eligible Tony voters show up to see the show. In addition, we're now even more likely to see skewed results: shows with larger casts and crew are even more likely to win because they have more people involved in them to vote, and fewer overall voters to offset that bias.

According to Adam Feldman, critic for Time Out New York, the idea that critics have a conflict of interest is "thin stuff indeed." He writes, "If anything, critics are among the voters least compromised by conflicts of interest, and most likely to vote objectively and fairly for the work they judge to be best." So why did the Tony committee really make this change? Feldman offers this rationale: "...[C]ritics, and indeed criticism, are inconvenient to the modern theater marketer: Old-fashioned in our insistence on quality, unreliable in our support for expensive projects and less necessary in light of the diffusion of information in the Internet age."

Cynical, to be sure, but I'm not so sure he's inaccurate. What do you think, dear reader? Is Feldman right? Is this part of a tacit marginalization of the critical mass? Or is this just sour grapes on the part of the slighted?

Hair: How to Market in a Recession

Attention, producers: Are you faced with selling a worthy production in the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression? Does your show have a fleeting amount of nudity? Why not play up the titillation factor for all it's worth? Why not get a prominent arts magazine to feature your cast members naked on the cover? In fact, why not get them to print numerous photos with "tasteful" closeups (i.e. no actual genitalia) of your male and female cast members au naturale? Sure, the actual nude scene only lasts about 15 seconds. But, hey, ya gotta sell tickets, right?

Hey, it's not like it hasn't been done before, right? (cf. The Full Monty)

And, to be honest, I'm all for anything that gets people to see this production of Hair, which I found thoroughly thrilling during its Central Park engagement. (Read my review here.) And I'm actually really looking forward to seeing it again, now that it is transferring to the venerable Al Hirschfeld Theater for a Broadway run.

New Hair Logo Heinous

I was playing around on IBDB tonight, and I came across what appears to be the logo for the upcoming Broadway revival of Hair. (See image left)

Pretty hideous, huh? The colors are washed-out and lifeless, the font is cheesy, and the composition is flat. I find nothing redeeming in this image, and it does little to make me want to see the show. And I've seen it already, and can attest to its quality. (Read my review of the show's Central Park stint.) There's a lot more inspiration involved in the production itself than apparently went into its visual identity. I still plan to see it again, but I can only hope the marketing folk plan to come up with something a bit more evocative and esthetically pleasing to get other folks interested.

The full cast for Hair has yet to be announced, but news has been trickling out. Gavin Creel, who was to have been Jesus in the canceled...er, postponed revival of Godspell, was recently cast in the central role of Claude. I saw Jonathan Groff play the role, and he was terrific, but apparently the Hair producers are asking the performers to work for scale, and Groff balked. Another potential performer who's taken a walk is Eden Espinosa, who was supposed to have played Sheila, but recently withdrew "for personal reasons." (Hmm...) No word yet on whether Will Swenson will return to the show as Berger, or whether he'll instead follow Rock of Ages to Broadway. The ROA gig might mean more money, although perhaps not, since the ROA tickets are priced to sell (at a relatively inexpensive $99 price point).

And it's not just the on-stage players in Hair that are changing. Producer Elizabeth I. McCann was recently relegated to more of a supporting role when the Public Theater brought in Spring Awakening producers Jeffrey Richards and Jerry Frankel as lead producers. Perhaps this is because McCann was having trouble raising the money to get the show up and running? Whatever, the opening night for Hair has moved from March 5th to March 31st to accomodate the personnel changes. Will the show retain its Central Park sparkle amid the sturm and drang? Stay tuned.

Will [title of show] Return?

As some of you know, in addition to blogging about musical theater and teaching it at the Boston Conservatory, I'm also a freelance writer and editor. Recently, I received my first assignment from The Advocate, the national news magazine for the LGBT community. The assignment was to find and profile gays and lesbians who had been significantly affected by the recent economic downturn.

As I was thinking about whom I could profile, I had a sudden inspiration. What about the [title of show] guys? Although there are various opinions on why the show [sniff sniff] closed, there seems little question that the struggling economy had something to do with it. So I gave Hunter Bell a shout, and he graciously agreed to participate in the article.

Alas, as I know all too well from my many years of journalism, all the stuff you hope to include in an article doesn't always make it into print. Although I was assigned to write three profiles, I actually wrote five, and The Advocate wound up using four of them. (The article posted to The Advocate's Web site today, and and hits the newsstands November 18th.) Hunter unfortunately got cut, not because the story wasn't compelling, but rather because we were going for a diverse mix of people, and we already had a story from someone in New York.

So, the folks at The Advocate have graciously allowed me to run Hunter's profile here on my blog. And here it is:

Recessionary Tremors: Hunter Bell

Hunter Bell is convinced that, were it not for the economic downturn, his show would still be on Broadway. And he means to bring it back 

On October 12th, 2008, Hunter Bell was starring in his own Broadway musical. On October 17th, he filed for unemployment.

Before it opened on Broadway in August, the musical [title of show] was a bit of an Off-Broadway phenomenon. The show’s plot relates how Bell and his writing partner Jeff Bowen, two self-proclaimed “nobodies in New York,” put together the plucky little musical. The pair helped fan the flames of fandom by producing a series of online video episodes, which helped the show develop a vociferous cult following, and eventually led to the Broadway run.

Unfortunately, the show only ran about three months, limping along at about 30% capacity at Broadway’s historic Lyceum Theater. Catty insiders blamed the show’s demise on its insular focus: much of the show’s considerable humor derives from its barrage of obscure theater-related references. But [title of show] librettist Hunter Bell thinks the show could have crossed over to attract a more mainstream audience, had it not been for the current economic uncertainty.

“We knew it was going to be a struggle,” says Bell. “We had an original story at a time when most Broadway musicals are based on established brands, like Shrek or 9 to 5. And when you introduce something new, it takes time for it to catch on.”

Bell says the show’s success was hampered by an economic double whammy. First, audiences currently have less expendable income, and are thus less likely to take a chance on an unknown show. “And I understand that totally,” he says “People are being a lot more careful with their money, and maybe see theater as a luxury.”

Second, investors have less available capital to keep the show open long enough to build awareness as well as a healthy advance ticket sale. “We had some really smart, awesome producers,” says Bell. “But it takes a lot of money to keep a show running.” And the folks who have that kind of money tend to be disproportionately sensitive to Wall Street fluctuations. “It’s not that people don’t believe in you,” says Bell. “It’s just that these are tricky times.”

For Bell personally, the show’s fortunes, or lack thereof, have presented an economic challenge. “I tried to put a little away from the run,” he says. “But a lot of that money we used to pay off the debts that we had created over the past four years trying to put the show together.” So for Bell and Bowen, it’s back to temping and the occasional catering job. “We’ll have to take odd jobs here and there,” says Bell, “But we’re really hoping that doing the show will open doors for us creatively. The hope is that we can eventually make a living as working artists.”

As for future earnings prospects, Bell says he and Bowen are working with the Rodgers and Hammerstein organization on licensing the show for regional and amateur productions. “And that will be a great for generating income in the future,” he says. Bell and Bowen are working on different versions of the show, depending on whether theater groups want to personalize the show. “The idea is to have the original version if you want to play Hunter and Jeff, but we’re also working on a sort of Mad Lib version, kind of a [title of show] template where you can fill in the blanks and make it your own,” he says. “I think we can find a way to do that and not compromise the show, to keep its integrity but still let people make it their own.”

But the show’s licensing future depends on what’s next for [title of show] in what Bell calls the “first-class arena.” Bell says that he and his show partners are actually planning to bring [title of show] back to Broadway once the economic turmoil abates. “Our true goal is to be back in the spring around awards season,” he says. “People are more focused on the theater then, and we want to be a part of that conversation.”

There’s not a question in Bell’s mind that he and his beloved show are the victims of circumstances beyond their control. “Had there not been an economic scare,” he says, “I believe that [title of show] would still be around, able to weather the storm.” – Christopher Caggiano

Speaking of Sarah Palin...

No sooner had I posted the photo below than I saw this poster on 8th Avenue. Ya gotta love New York.

Frightening, indeed.

 

Speaking of Spamalot...

I was walking across the street in Manhattan and this poster caught my eye.

What IS the difference between a killer rabbit and a hockey mom? In at least one instance, not a whole heck of a lot.

Made me laugh more than Spamalot did. Which isn't saying much, but hey...

Sing-Along Mamma Mia Hits Theaters Next Week

The producers of the "Mamma Mia" movie have announced that they will be releasing a "sing-along" edition of the film into select theaters nationally on August 29th. The new version will feature the lyrics to each of the songs on the screen, encouraging audience members to join in singing their favorite ABBA ditties.

It's really a brilliant marketing idea, designed no doubt to enhance revenue by getting people to see the movie a second time. Because the primary attraction of the movie, as well as the hit stage version, has always been the insidiously tuneful and catchy ABBA songs.

I almost titled this post "Follow the Bouncing Bomb," but apparently the movie is anything but a bomb. So far, "Mamma Mia" has grossed about $116 million in the U.S., and about $321 million worldwide. (That's still a far cry from the stage version's $2-billion worldwide gross, but just wait for the DVD release.) The film cost a reported $56 million to make, so depending on the notoriously funky Hollywood accounting, this certainly could qualify as a hit.

But that doesn't mean that the movie is any good. I got flamed a bit when I posted my extremely negative review of the movie. People said I should lighten up, that it's just meant to be fluffy fun. I would remind these people that there's a difference between intent and execution. Sure, the movie is meant to be light and humorous, but even fluff needs to be well crafted, which "Mamma Mia" isn't. In their zest for the ABBA songs and the admittedly stellar cast, people seem to be ignoring whether the movie is well made, whether the story makes any sense, or whether the performances are any good. Because, IMHO, it isn't, it doesn't, and they aren't. 

So I shan't be seeing the sing-along "Mamma Mia," but I may decide to take in the Broadway version of Mamma Mia on one of my upcoming NYC jaunts. In fact, I may see it the same weekend I'm seeing Shrek. The reason: the Broadway Theater and the Winter Garden are the only remaining Broadway houses that I've never been in, and seeing both Shrek and Mamma Mia on the same weekend would make it a sort of milestone for me. (I saw Mamma Mia on tour in Boston.) Or I could just wait until Mamma Mia closes, but who knows what horror might take its place. Yeah, I'm probably better off just biting the bullet and getting a discount ticket to Mamma Mia. Somehow this crap seems to work better on stage than on screen.

Evil Dead: The Marketing Campaign

To advertise the Toronto run of Evil Dead: The Musical, the marketing staff have come up with a pretty clever poster campaign. You might have seen these before, but I finally found some decent scans and decided to post them. If only the musical itself were even half as clever or as funny as the posters, they might have a winner on their hands. Unfortunately, the musical is a stinker. (Read my review of the Off-Broadway production.)

Rowan Atkinson to Star in London's Oliver

I love London, and have been waiting for a theatrical justification to return to that wondrous city. But much of the stuff that's been opening recently in the West End, at least in terms of musicals, has been utter crap. (e.g. Dirty Dancing, Desperately Seeking Susan, Lord of the Rings. Yeesh.) Well, now I'm thinking that I may want to plan a trip across the pond sometime early next year.

I had heard that Andrew Lloyd Webber was doing the reality-TV thing again to choose a Nancy for yet another London revival of Lionel Bart's Oliver!. The show is titled "I'd Do Anything," and follows on the heels of a number of successful ALW-sponsored reality-casting efforts, including "How Do You Solve a Problem Like Maria," in which audience members chose a Maria for the current London revival of The Sound of Music, as well as "Any Dream Will Do," which focused on choosing the title character for a revival of Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat. I'm sort of struck by the show name "I'd Do Anything." It really seems to sum up reality TV in a nutshell, don't it? "Any Dream Will Do" doesn't have the same sense of desperation.

Despite my historical associations with the show Oliver!, news of the revival didn't pique my interest at first. I mean, it's not a very good show, although it has many terrific songs. But then I heard that British comedian Rowan Atkinson is scheduled to play Fagin.

I'm in.

I'm a huge fan of British comedy: Monty Python, Beyond the Fringe, Flanders and Swann, "Absolutely Fabulous," "Little Britain," "The League of Gentlemen," etc. And I'm a particular fan of the old "Blackadder" shows from the 80s. Rowan Atkinson is a masterful comic, and across the four seasons of the show he portrays a delightful series of conniving historical footnotes, from a toadying member of the court of Elizabeth I, to a Machiavellian butler for George IV when he was Prince Regent. As for Atkinson's Mr. Bean, well, not so much. But the combination of Oliver! and one of my favorite performers has me planning frequent flier miles and thinking of floors and couches I can crash on in the general London area.

The TV show is also of interest because of the presence of host Graham Norton and celebrity judge John Barrowman. Both are openly gay, and each is adorable in his own particular way. Norton also hosts "The Graham Norton Show" on BBC America, and is easily the funniest man currently on television. Barrowman has appeared in such West End shows as Anything Goes and Sunset Boulevard, and currently stars in "Doctor Who" spin-off "Torchwood," also on BBC America. And he's yummy.

Oliver! opens at the Theater Royal, Drury Lane in January 2009.

Logos for Cry-Baby and A Catered Affair

I recently came across the new official logos for the new Broadway musicals Cry-Baby and A Catered Affair. I must say that the contrast between the two offers graphic illustration of what makes for a successful visual identity for a Broadway musical. And what doesn't.

I like the Cry-Baby logo a lot. It has a cool, retro kind of look to it, in keeping with the show's 1950's setting. It sort of looks like the cover of one of those trashy 50s novels, or the poster from a James Dean movie. Click on the link above or the image above for a closer look. The colors are warm and inviting, and yet there's an appropriate sense of menace. The between-the-legs perspective seems borrowed from the poster to "For Your Eyes Only," the James Bond movie, but on the whole the image really makes me want to see the show.

And then there's the logo for A Catered Affair. I posted previously about the early version of this show's visual identity, saying it was perhaps the most boring logo ever. Well, they've made it more lively, cluttered even, but they certainly haven't made it more esthetically appealing. On the whole, this image is washed out, awkwardly arranged, and unfocused. And the human figures have a creepy, plastic feel to them, kind of like those old Duracell battery commercials with that family of macabre automatons.

Tickets for both shows aren't on sale for the general public yet, but are available for American Express Gold Card members. The only reason I own a Gold Card is to gain access to these exclusive events. I'll be seeing both of these shows next month, but I'm particularly excited about seeing Cry-Baby with three of my fellow theater bloggers, Steve from Steve on Broadway, Alicia from Things You'll Learn to Love About Me, and Esther from Gratuitous Violins. We correspond electronically all the time, and regularly comment on each other's blogs, but this will be the first time I'll meet these folks face-to-face.

Steve, Alicia, and Esther: I'm looking forward to meeting all of you in person.

Legally Blonde Reality Show on MTV

The Hollywood writers' strike seems to be affecting Broadway in some indirect ways. Faced with a lack of scribes for its scripted shows, MTV has announced a reality show  to help the producers of the Broadway musical Legally Blonde choose a successor for Laura Bell Bundy in the lead role of Elle Woods. (Reality shows employ "content producers," who are cheaper and don't belong to the writers' union.) The network recently announced national auditions in anticipation of taping the show in February and March.

It's a questionable tactic, at least from a ratings perspective. By all accounts, the reality show "Grease: You're the One That I Want" wasn't much of a Nielsen bonanza, although the Grease revival that it helped to cast seems to be holding its own at the box office. On the other hand, ticket sales for Legally Blonde got a shot in the arm from its recent airings on MTV, despite predictions from many people that running the show on TV would prove disastrous.

Many people will also likely decry this reality-show move as a publicity stunt. Well, I say, what's wrong with a publicity stunt, if it keeps a decent show running? I've long defended stunt-casting as an effective way to keep good shows up and good people employed. And Legally Blonde, while certainly not a masterpiece, is a fun bit of fluff, if a bit on the shrill side. (See my review here.) The show is an intentionally populist Broadway offering, and thus is in no danger of compromising its "artistic integrity" by relegating its central casting to a populist voting process. Plus, the show will bring increased visibility to Broadway in general beyond Broadway's typical demographic (i.e. from old, rich, white people to young, rich, white people).

Let's just hope the whole reality-show thing doesn't go too far. I mean, we certainly wouldn't want this casting-by- popular-vote thing to become a habit or anything. In a larger sense, art is not a democratic process, nor should it be.

Rapp and Pascal Return to Rent

Adam Pascal and Anthony Rapp have returned to the roles that they originated in Rent for six weeks this summer. Eleven years on, are these guys looking a bit long in the tooth for the roles? Here are some recent photos of Rapp and Pascal. You be the judge. I'll just say this: pay particular attention to the photos in which they pose with the other current cast members. "Grandpa, what was it like when you were on Broadway?"

Do you call it stunt casting when you're bringing back the original stars? Well, if you define stunt casting as an attempt to increase box office by bringing in a name, then I guess you do. The question is, how well will it work? This reminds me of when Barry and Fran Weissler brought back Bebe Neuwirth to Chicago, but this time as Roxie Hart rather than Velma Kelly, which I think was moderately effective, although certainly not the box-office boon that was the Broadway debut of hip-hop star Usher.

Isn't it insane how long Rent has lasted? I mean, it's a good show, don't get me wrong. A very good show. But it's racked up more than 4,600 performances, making it the seventh-longest-running show in Broadway history. And it's brought in more than $250 million in gross sales. That's a quarter of a billion dollars, folks. Sure, it's been playing to half-empty houses quite a bit over them past few months, but it does manage a week here or there when it takes in more than $400,000, which is still pretty frickin' good.

I saw Rent the night before it opened on Broadway, and it was one of the most electrifying nights I've ever had in the theater. Part of the power of the show for me was that my boyfriend at the time was HIV-positive, and by the time Collins sang the powerfully dramatic reprise of "I'll Cover You," I was a great big wet sloppy mess. Over the years I've come to recognize the flaws in the show, but overall it's great theater, an important theatrical milestone, and a terrific roller-coaster ride of emotion.

So I hope the show keeps on running, exposing a new generation of theater goers to the sadly lost genius that was Jonathan Larson.

Spamalot World Record

There's nothing like a good publicity stunt.

Last March, the producers of the hit Broadway version of Spamalot gathered 1,789 Monty Python fans together in New York's Shubert Alley to create what was then the biggest-ever, and presumably the first-ever, all-coconut orchestra.

Participants banged together empty halves of coconut shells, an homage to the preferred mode of transportation in the classic "Monty Python and the Holy Grail," to the tune of "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life." (Which is actually from "Life of Brian," but I digress.)

In a case of friendly oneupmanship, members of the London production amassed 5,567 coconut-wielding enthusiasts in London's Trafalgar Square, handily breaking the world record. Original Python members Terry Jones and Terry Gilliam were on hand to conduct the proceedings.

The event got tons of press. At this writing, Google lists about 339,000 Internet references to the event. Even NPR included a blurb on the event on Monday's "All Things Considered."

As I've posted before, I'm a huge Monty Python fan, so I was ecstatic when I heard about Spamalot. But I was a bit disappointed in the actual show. It's a tremendous amount of fun, but it's not great musical theater. The book and the staging are hysterical, but the score is just awful: puerile melodies, bad scansion, too much assonance. It works in the theater, but it doesn't hold up on repeated listenings.

But I'm glad that the show has become and international hit. Currently there are productions on in New York, London, Las Vegas, as well as a U.S. touring production. Blockbusters tend raise the profile of musical theater in the eyes of potential ticket buyers, and a rising tide, to a certain extent, lifts all boats.