ALADDIN
|
ROCKY
|
IF/THEN
|
|
|
I usually play “conflict of interest” by ear and on a
case-by-case basis, but my Spidey sense says I have to be extremely cautious
where three of the new musicals are concerned, above and beyond the norm.
Much as I love deconstructive analysis of musicals—if, as a critic, I live
for anything in the writing, it’s that—there are too many crossed (and
one shared) professional paths; I don’t dare.
But
upon reflection, what I think I can offer, neutrally and without
risking impropriety—which might in a certain context be more useful now
that said shows are well-defined in their niches—is a little appraisal by way of consumer
advice. Because there is, with each of these shows, a love-it contingent and a
not-so-much contingent (in these cases, “hate” would be too extreme) and a
clear dividing line separating the factions. Though across the board, the
observable audience response to all these shows is one of populist approval—laughs in the
right places, applause in the right proportion, a seeming air of
satisfaction—all have vehement debaters on either side of the equation in
aftermath conversatons.
And
I can tell you—I think—what to expect such that you’ll know right
away on which side of the dividing line you’ll fall. (I might add “…and whether
or not to attend” as well, but that’s extreme too. Mainstream Broadway musicals
have so much at stake these days that full-metal bombs and conceptual train
wrecks rarely survive the developmental process into full production. So, after
a fashion, everything’s worth seeing. But if you’re counting your pennies, this
will help you prioritize.)
There
were two additional new musicals that fell under this topic heading
too, ones with which I have no conflicts that I'm aware of. But all
things considered, it seemed appropriate to include those as well.
You'll find them at the end.
********
The
dividing line where Disney’s Aladdin is
concerned, is the place where it crosses content-wise into shameless
anachronism, and production-wise, into giddy excess. Linguistic anachrosism of
language is, of course, coin of the realm where Disney animated features are
concerned; and as for the scenic and visual excess—in the absence of the
magic that can be achieved with animation, director Casey Nicholaw and
cohorts have gone a route that can best be described as Arabia-cum-Vegas, the
magic of glitz, glitter and too-much-is-never-enough. When James Monroe
Iglehart as the Genie kicks it up with Menken & Ashman's “Friend Like Me” and
gets to the “Can your friends do this/that?’ section, extravagance is just the
beginning. Trick and effect and opulence follow trick and effect and opulence
and just when you think there’s no more to do, there’s three times more to do.
This is absolutely entertainment for the hoi-polloi, unabashedly
self-conscious, the ultimate in animation-to-live-action merchandising, and if
you were to accuse it of that, it would smile at you and go, “Uh-huh,” and
consider that part of the fun. In short, you’ll either find Aladdin to be
exhausting, or you’ll have the time (and the carpet ride) of your life.
Rosalyn
Drexler is a pop artist and novelist now in her 80s and still productive, who
has had many lives. Among them in her youth was a brief career as a lady
wrestler. She wrote a semi-autobiographical novel about the experience and, as
will happen in the world of publishing, that flagged her as the Ballentine
Books tie-in editor’s choice to novelize Sylvester Stallone’s
screenplay for Rocky, which she
did in 1977, under the pseudonym “Julia Sorel.” In being interviewed for an
article about the craft of novelizing, published not long after that book’s
release, she talked about how the text of her manuscript had been policed by
Stallone, who had contractual approvals. And she mentioned passages in which
she sought to explore certain aspects of Rocky’s internal life (as I recall,
his sexual life) that Stallone had slashed from the final version, either
disagreeing with her interpretation of his characters in that regard, or just
not wanting to go there. (Stallone himself would novelize Rocky II and Rocky
IV, with Rocky III by-lined to Robert E. Hoban.) Nonetheless,
the little book, clocking in at only about 140 pages, is a breathless and
involving read, zipping by so efficiently you don’t even question how deep it
does or doesn’t go.
And
one gets a similar feeling from the musical version of Rocky: that
Stallone, though he didn’t hands-on write it, was nonetheless hands-on and very
specifically. For in most aspects, it really is a lateral transposition from
screen to stage—not a musical enhancement, not an elevation, not an
enrichment, but simply (and not so simply) the film writ to another medium.
Everything about it is attractive and paced well under the impeccably flashy
direction of Alex Timbers. The score manages to feel just
right and simultaneously like Ahrens and Flaherty Lite, as if, like Ms.
Drexler, they were permitted to dig this far and no further. (I have no idea if
this is true; I only report on the sensation.) Likewise the libretto by the
ubiquitous adapter of iconic properties, Thomas Meehan. And the
actors manage the neat trick of making their own marks on the roles yet
absolutely honoring the film iconography; in nuance they find their own way;
but in soul and substance they offer no grand variation. Rocky says the
marquee, Rocky is exactly, but exactly, what you get.
The
dividing line marks whether or not this is enough for you—and this holds true whether or not
you know the original film. As with Aladdin, this,
in
its very different way, is intended as a crowd-pleaser by way of
familiarity (even if you don't know the film, you know its pop culture
resonance);
but familiarity delivered in a first class package.
********
The very concept of If/Then creates
its dividing line, and not just because the story itself embodies dividing
lines. It concerns an “average” upardly mobile woman (Idina Menzel) in the
city and the various directions her life might take. If she says yes to dating
the returning military veteran (James Snyder) who
asks her out impulsively, her life and relationships will go one way; if she
doesn’t, they’ll go another. Without geting too bogged
down in intricate variation—If/Then sticks to the broad
strokes—authors Brian Yorkey (book and lyrics) and Tom Kitt
(music)—the team that created Next to Normal—bounce
the story and the audience from path to path without segue (expecting you to
make the intuitive leap, which most do, and certainly I did, fairly easily;
though I’ve heard-tell of those who are completely bewildered), dramatizing the
possibilities.
But
with the heroine being a “typical” modern woman, her friends and colleagues are
also typical whatevers. They can only be archetypes, familiar character tropes
serving familiar function without the idiosyncrasy that defines larger-than-life characters…because if they were larger-than-life, that would work against
the intended points of identification, i.e Might these lives and choices be
yours? Whatever singular definition If/Then's roster of characters have comes only from singular actors
filling them out; and different actors would provide different definition. The
very notion of highly idiosyncratic characters fights the premise of multiple
choice, for idiosyncratic characters tend to be driven to follow a specific
path—that’s what makes them unique.
And
here’s the dividing line—come to think of it, the If/Then dividing
line.
If the game
of following generic characters on multiple “Choose Your Destiny” trajectories
affords you the vicarious mixed emotions that resonate with your own potential
alternate universes, then the musical will
appeal hugely. If the game sounds like following a bunch of average
civilians who can’t figure out what Lifetime or Oxygen
movie plot they’re supposed to be a part of, then
you’re
likely to grow impatient. Of all the musicals discussed here, this is
the one with the boldest dividing line and the one debated most
passionately.
********
So far as I’m aware, as indicated above, I have no particular conflict of
interest where reviewing The Bridges of Madison County is
concerned, but it so neatly falls under the umbrella topic of Musicals with a
Dividing Line that I might as well include it here too.
Adapted
from the novel by Robert James Waller, set in 1965, it tells the story
of Francesca (Kelli O’Hara) an Italian immigrant who,
having become the wife of Bud (Hunter Foster) an Iowa
farmer, finds that her life has settled into a numbiung routine; that her
youthful dreams of seeing the world and its wonders will never be realized;
that while loving the home and family she helped build around herself is
significant, it can’t quell the restlessness. And then when Bud and the kids go
off to a farm fair to enter a competition, a romantic stranger, Robert (Steven
Pasquale), a journalist-photographer surveying the area, just
happens to show up. And one thing leads to another…
Though
love stories and romances are almost always key elemens of musicals, they’re rarely terribly effective when they’re the primary, central focus of a
musical. That’s because a musical bespeaks a heightened, compressed
storytelling form that usually requires a certain amount of narrative muscle
and movement to sustain interest and tension…and love stories that are only love
stories have relatively little narrative muscle, as a result of
having very little actual plot beyond will-they/won’t-they/when-will-they sleep
together and what might the consequences be? The lion’s share of focus goes to
the innerjourney, to how people are feeling, and since
there’s a limit to how much you can sing about that without
wallowing in the same waters for a protracted period of time, the only other
stuff to sing about is backstory: How I got to be the person I am now. And sure
enough, The Bridges of Madison County plays in that extremely
limited sandbox.
I’m
not sure what to say about Marsha Norman’s libretto: it’s facile
and proficient but doesn’t bear up under much scrutiny. (For example: Initially,
Robert dutifully resists Francesca’s advances; the next night, just before
succumbing, he declares that he understands the moral gray area, which is why
when such situations come up in his itinerant life, he opts not to stay. He
reminds her that he left, the night before. This is
supposed to be his moment of nobility, but it only begs the question, “Are you
saying you’re constitutionally predisposed to screw farmer’s wives? Are you
saying that having left the night before legitimizes showing up today?”) But in
that regard it’s no more credibility-challenged than many a chick-lit popular
romance. No, the compensation comes from the music and lyrics of Jason
Robert Brown. He has imbued the characters' lyrics with a
higher-than-average intelligence, perception and sense of introspecton; and he has likewise imbued the
music they sing to with a harmonic and rhythmic sophistication that evokes the
setting without being anchored to the simple pop-music tropes that are its
identifyiung clichés. In other words, even when he’s treading water, he’s ruminating
interestingly—at the very least providing interesting melodies and
wordplay to hold your attention and keep you concentrating. This is no easy
trick to pull off.
And
here’s the dividing line: If you can ride with the show’s high craftsmanship (and
highly theatrical staging by director Bartlett Sher) and
find your pleasures there, The Bridges of Madison County will unequivocally cast
its spell. If on the other hand you can’t make yourself unaware of it featuring
prosaic, familiar characters and about two inches worth of plot, its
intelligence will come as scant compensation.
********
I also, to the best of my knowledge, have no conflicts
regarding Bullets Over Broadway, but that
too has split audiences down the middle.
There’s
no question that everything about the delivery of Woody Allen’s
adaptation of his own film—a comedy about a young dramatist’s first
Broadway play, which isn’t getting on without a gangster backer’s girlfriend
having one of the leads—is delivered in first class style. If you don’t
know the film going in—and I didn’t—the storytelling is brisk, the
casting is impeccable, Susan Stroman’s direction is clean, her
choreography is (as always) insanely inventive…
But
there’s that score.
A
compilation—some might say a jukebox—score of popular tunes from the
20s. As all new shows with inadequately literate (or no) living composers must
these days, Bullets Over Broadway has employed the redoubtable
“music supervisor” Glen Kelly to give the songs context
appropriate arrangements and—uniquely, in this case—to fiddle with
the lyrics here and there to keep them from straying afield of the dramatic
point.
Between
the selection of the songs and the treatment they’re given, the score is far
better integrated than such things have any right to be. But even so, because
the songs are standards of the period and some of them very familiar ones at
that, the integration weirdly makes you even more aware of
the parlor trick. No sooner does a song start to land, when you wonder if it
will sustain its entire length and you begin listening for anomalies or
changes. And though strictly speaking, the songs aren’t “all the same,” there’s
a near-constant upbeat pulse to most of them, with the result that on
aggregate, they seem (to many ears) to come over in a general wash. My ears didn’t
find it so precisely, but there was a point at which I stopped expecting
variations in energy level to be significant.
And
here’s the dividing line:
If
you’re happy enough to just give over (which ironically takes a certain effort
of will), you’ll have a fine time. If you’re not that lenient…you’re likely to
still have an okay time? But you won’t be that satisfied when it’s over.
Go to David Spencer's Profile
Return to Home Page