HOME ALL THAT CHAT ATC WEST COAST SHOPPIN' RUSH BOARD FAQS

LOGIN REGISTER SEARCH THREADED MODE

not logged in

Threaded Order | Chronological Order

The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: Glitter 10:54 pm EDT 08/15/14

I've seen The Visit twice this week. First off, here's been some discussion abiut which translation they used as source. It was the Valency.

I ADORE what they've done with the show. It's smooth, economical, expressionistic, full of beautiful imagery. The new orchestrations are Viennese, operatic, and gorgeous.

Gone: One Legged Tango, most of the buttons on the songs, all the husbands, minor towns people, and Lenny & Benny. The Schell children are now adults, not kids.

I enjoyed Rees' performance, but it didn't mesh with the whole show for me. Maybe his accent? His very animated and blustery style? It's not that he was bad or made wrong choices at all, but it didn't click with the whole for me.

If you love Doyle, you 'll like what he's done. If you loathe him, you'll loathe what he's done. Lots of people on stage, watching and walking. I think it serves the material beautifully. I was surprised that the show opens with "youthful cunnilingus" (to put it politely), but it fits. I know it sounds out of left field, but it does work and isn't awkward or funny (is it a first? How many other shows open with someone going down on his girlfriend?)

There is a beautiful, moving pas de deux between Claire and her younger self. Several people around me teared up....excellent conception and performance. Also, The Visit traditionally ends with horror creeping over the Mayor's face. Doyle has given the show a new ending that is even more unsettling and beautiful. It's powerful and took my breath away.

Last night, I was in Chita's dressing room after the show, and spent a good part of the evening with John Kander. Talking to him candidly about the show and his goals with it was gratifying, and I am confident in saying that people (and reviewers) who focus on the revenge, the horror, and the politics of the show are completely missing the point of this show.

Should it transfer? Yes. I say that because most of the people I overheard after were saying lovely things about the music, the imagery, the performances, the romance, being moved etc etc. The few people I overheard who didn't like it were very vocal in their dislike of the story (one person said "well, that was a sour evening" as his wife was wiping away tears).

Lots of superlative things have been said about Chita's performance, and when it comes to NYC there will be many more. It's a performance worthy of her years :)

any more questions?


reply to this message |
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: Murphy27A 12:38 am EDT 08/17/14
In reply to: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - Glitter 10:54 pm EDT 08/15/14

Having very much enjoyed the Goodman production (which I saw twice)and the Signature production, I'm curious about what material has been further cut to get the show down to 95 minutes. I understand that "One Legged Tango" is gone, but is "I Would Never Leave You" which led into it still there? If so, how does that song deal with Lenny and Benny's absence? I know the original demo recording had a verse for Rudy, a verse for Lenny & Benny, a verse for the Eunuchs and a verse for the husband. By Goodman/Signature-time, Clare's verse had replaced the husband's The counterpoint sections of the song seem like they'd be lacking without Lenny and Benny's verse. Curious how that's dealt with.


reply to this message |
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: Glitter 01:21 am EDT 08/17/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - Murphy27A 12:38 am EDT 08/17/14

I Would Never Leave You loses Lenny & Benny, but there's still 4 voices to do harmony and counterpoint.

elsewhere, there are lots of cuts in the book. Winter is trimmed a bit. The ending of Yellow Shoes is cut way down and goes right into nearly instantly into A Confession. No Winter reprise.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: smv 10:50 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - Glitter 10:54 pm EDT 08/15/14

Does anyone remember the opening of David Hare's "The Judas Kiss?" That too opened as you describe, although I'm not sure it was youthful.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: enoch10 03:25 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - Glitter 10:54 pm EDT 08/15/14

thanks for posting this. you're familiar with previous incarnations and the source material so i trust your judgement.

sorry to hear it's the valency - there are such better translations to work from. i don't know how the legality of this sort of thing works. if only the valency can be used in performance does that extend to adaptations as well? i guess it is a moot point.

>> Should it transfer? Yes.

but do you think it will? i'm actually hoping the rumors about it going to london first are true. i wish SB had.

again, thanks for the report. i've been looking for it.


reply to this message | reply to first message
The question of the source material (Durrenmatt vs. Valency)

Posted by: AlanScott 04:28 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - enoch10 03:25 pm EDT 08/16/14

The billing says:

Based on the play by Friedrich Dürrenmatt
Translated by Maurice Valency

Based on that, it doesn't seem that they would have contractually prohibited from using anything that's in the original but not in the Valency version. It seems merely that they were obligated to credit Valency as well as Dürrenmatt.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: TGWW 08:37 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - Glitter 10:54 pm EDT 08/15/14

"Should it transfer? Yes."

Thank you for that honest and unbiased opinion, after spending the evening with Chita Rivera & John Ebb, of course.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: Glitter 12:25 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - TGWW 08:37 am EDT 08/16/14

knowing them doesn't mean I blindly worship them.
When their work moves me, it does. When it doesn't, it doesn't (Curtains and Drood are good example of the latter).

Some people here on ATC who saw this iteration of the show before I did feel that the cuts went too deep. I went in prepared to be honest if what I felt the heart or structure of the show was cut out, but it truly didn't feel that way to me...I find the book is a study in economy and much of the score works even better for me now. I didn't think the Goodman production should have transferred. I thought the Signature one was *this* close. This is the version that I think should be seen on Broadway.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: bwaydiva1 09:00 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - TGWW 08:37 am EDT 08/16/14

Can any of us say we're unbiased about anything? (I know I can be made passionate about shows I see-although it doesn't usually come from spending an evening with luminaries like Kander and Chita.) I mean I am of the opinion that "The Visit" will transfer because Kander has big and powerful friends (and much like what I've read about Finding Neverland-this is the first incarnation of this version-and probably needs more work-scratch that-does need more work. There is one, maybe two, fully fleshed characters in the whole story.) I predict the Booth after Elephant Man and that Kelli will need to wait another year for her Tony.

And it's John Kander, Fred Ebb, the lyricist, sadly has left us (which may be why the score to The Visit sounds unfinished).


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: AlanScott 11:23 pm EDT 08/15/14
In reply to: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - Glitter 10:54 pm EDT 08/15/14

"Also, The Visit traditionally ends with horror creeping over the Mayor's face."

Do you mean that the earlier productions of the musical have ended that way? Or the play? If so, is there anything in the text to indicate that? I don't have a copy here of any of the translations or adaptations, but I don't recall that being in the text. I don't think the later film version ends that way. I do have that here and I could check. Anyway, just wondering.

Thanks for the report.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: enoch10 03:33 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - AlanScott 11:23 pm EDT 08/15/14

if so, i find it less disturbing than the decision to make her jewish and gypsy.

is anyone familiar enough with the valency to know if this can be justified from that translation? i was willing to wade back through it just to see but i can't find it. i probably got rid of it after the bowles came out.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: BruceinIthaca 01:03 am EDT 08/18/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - enoch10 03:33 pm EDT 08/16/14

I think the point was the townspeople viewed her as Jewish and a gypsy, both of which they would have looked down upon (indeed, this echoes the Holocaust, of course)--I don't the play itself was disparaging her. For all we know, she was poor, came from the wrong part of town, and was full of life--and they added on these identities as categorical markers of the "outsider," the abject they did not want to integrate into their "culture."


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: Glitter 11:26 pm EDT 08/15/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - AlanScott 11:23 pm EDT 08/15/14

earlier productions of the musical have ended that way...Mark Jacoby did a particularly unsettling grimace.

Sorry for the confusion!


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: AlanScott 12:36 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - Glitter 11:26 pm EDT 08/15/14

Just wanted to be sure. Thanks for the clarification.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: garyd 11:02 pm EDT 08/15/14
In reply to: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - Glitter 10:54 pm EDT 08/15/14

Is not the work about revenge, and horror, and politics? If not, what is it about?


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit is not an "adaptation"

Posted by: actor103 11:32 pm EDT 08/15/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - garyd 11:02 pm EDT 08/15/14

Full disclosure:

I am likely becoming an investor in the Bway production that is being considered.

I love the play. When effectively produced, it is a head spinning gut wrenching piece of theater. I have gone on far too long about why I love the musical. So to spare everyone, I will just say that the musical feels like it's own creation. It does not feel like a play has been taken and sculpted into a musical. Indeed the show.bills itself as "based on" the original play. For me that is what the musical is. It uses the play as a base, upon which it creates a love story devoid of sentiment without sacrificing the grand and complex power of love. To me it says that love is a true tangible force that can be utterly destructive and transformative at the same time. I don't know...the musical breaks my heart. And I am able to clearly separate myself from a play that I love and embrace the musical as its own thing. If you are looking a version of the play with music neatly interwoven, that is not what Kander/ebb/McNally are interested in doing here. Thus to me, this is not an adaptation. If that is what you are looking for, you will probably be disapointed. However, that is what I was expecting to get and am now very close to becoming an investor.so who the hell knows.


reply to this message | reply to first message
You think this version takes liberties? Check out Vienna!

Posted by: stevemr 09:57 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: The Visit is not an "adaptation" - actor103 11:32 pm EDT 08/15/14

In light of this discussion about what's an adaptation, check out the trailer below for the brand new GERMAN musical version. Cowboys, gas masks, power pop!

Link Trailer for new German musical of The Visit

reply to this message | reply to first message
I Think That Looks Great!

Posted by: enoch10 03:37 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: You think this version takes liberties? Check out Vienna! - stevemr 09:57 am EDT 08/16/14

!


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: You think this version takes liberties? Check out Vienna!

Posted by: Teacher64 02:17 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: You think this version takes liberties? Check out Vienna! - stevemr 09:57 am EDT 08/16/14

Sorry to say, but that version looks more interesting than what I saw at Williamstown.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: You think this version takes liberties? Check out Vienna!

Posted by: actor103 11:44 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: You think this version takes liberties? Check out Vienna! - stevemr 09:57 am EDT 08/16/14

OMG. That looks absolutely amazing. Do you know anything about this version? How was it recieved? Clearly, two completey different musicals with very different agendas. It would seem. Would liketo know more about this. Do you anyone who has seen it?


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: You think this version takes liberties? Check out Vienna!

Posted by: stevemr 12:55 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: You think this version takes liberties? Check out Vienna! - actor103 11:44 am EDT 08/16/14

If you google the German title, you can find lots of material -- in German.
There's a CD --- on the Amazon Germany website, there are the usual 30 second samples of each track -- it has a Europop sound to it.

Link Samples from the score

reply to this message | reply to first message
Better links ...

Posted by: Ann 06:15 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: You think this version takes liberties? Check out Vienna! - stevemr 12:55 pm EDT 08/16/14

... unless you live in Germany.

BesuchDer Besuch der alten Dame Original Vienna Cast
(HitSquad - new on 2 CDs/iTunes)
Moritz Schneider, Michael Reed and Wolfgang Hofer musical adaptation of Friedrich Dürrenmatt's play The Visit. Pia Douwes, Uwe Kröger, Ethan Freeman, Masha Karell, Hans Neblung, Norbert Lamla, Gunter Sonneson, Peter Kratochvil, Jeroen Phaff, Marianne Curn, Niklas Abel, Lisa Habermann, Riccardo Greco, Illia Hollweg. Complete recording.




reply to this message | reply to first message
re: You think this version takes liberties? Check out Vienna!

Posted by: bwaydiva1 10:12 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: You think this version takes liberties? Check out Vienna! - stevemr 09:57 am EDT 08/16/14

I will commit travesty and say I think that's more interesting and innovative at the very least.


reply to this message | reply to first message
If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: AlanScott 12:43 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: The Visit is not an "adaptation" - actor103 11:32 pm EDT 08/15/14

"Indeed the show.bills itself as 'based on' the original play. For me that is what the musical is."

How else would it bill itself? I think the two standard phrases are "based on" and "adapted from," and occasionally we see something like "suggested by." I usually take "based on" to suggest more fidelity to the source material than "adapted from," while "suggested by" would indicate the least.

I've never heard anyone suggest that a musical that is either "based on" or "adapted from" another work is not an adaptation.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: actor103 01:24 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise) - AlanScott 12:43 am EDT 08/16/14

Very interesting. So adopting my thinking, should THE VISIT(musical) say that it "is "inspired by" rather than "based on". The show just does not seem at all interested in reflecting the same things as the play. The focus is entirely different, even opposed to, the message of the play. TOTALY different agendas.
So...what the hell is that then? In Terms of how the producers should bill the show. See, this is sort of why I love the musical. It is just really unique on a lot of levels. So, how do you categorize what they are doing?


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: enoch10 03:39 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - actor103 01:24 am EDT 08/16/14

>> The focus is entirely different, even opposed to, the message of the play.

what the fuck are you talking about? have you even read the play?

how is the musical's focus "entirely different, even opposed to, the message of the play?"


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: actor103 10:02 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - enoch10 03:39 pm EDT 08/16/14

Geez, what sad little rant.

To answer your question, yes. Both the Einem Libretto and Valency.

So you do not understand the musical or how I see opposition. Ok.

Pretty pitiful and pointless post. But hope ya feel better. LOL.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: enoch10 11:05 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - actor103 10:02 pm EDT 08/16/14

still wondering how is the musical's focus "entirely different, even opposed to, the message of the play?"


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: AlanScott 01:53 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - actor103 01:24 am EDT 08/16/14

Personally, based on what I know of the musical, it doesn't sound to me like it has a totally different agenda than the play on which it is based.

And it certainly would not exist without the play.

Flower Drum Song (the original version of the musical) billed itself as "Based on the novel by C. Y. Lee," even though it was an exceptionally free adaptation, truly more "suggested by" than "based on." But apart from contractual matters, it probably depends on your personal interpretation of what the words in question mean (and what they mean in context).

Guys and Dolls billed itself as "Based on a story and characters by Damon Runyon," but if you read the story in question, you'll see how the musical basically turns the story on its head, taking two character names and their professions and the idea of a crap game and almost nothing else. It's really only suggested by the story, along with the general milieu of Runyon, using character names (and a few character traits and professions associated with those characters).

My Fair Lady billed itself as "Adapted from Bernard Shaw's 'Pygmalion,'" which to me would suggest something freer than "Based on," but My Fair Lady sticks very closely to Pygmalion, carrying over vast chunks of dialogue from the play and borrowing other ideas from Shaw's published screenplay.

It may be that the Shaw estate thought that Shaw would have preferred "adapted from" given his famous refusal to allow any musicals to be based on any of his plays after his extreme displeasure with The Chocolate Soldier.

So I just don't think there's an answer. And, again, the producers may have no choice in the matter. Contracts with the Durrenmatt and Valency estates have already been signed.

Not to mention that there is already an opera based on the Durrenmatt play and another musical based on it that I believe is currently playing in Vienna.

Link Der Besuch der Alten Dame

reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: enoch10 03:40 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - AlanScott 01:53 am EDT 08/16/14

you're so much nicer than i am.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: ukpaul 07:43 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - AlanScott 01:53 am EDT 08/16/14

What strictures do the Durrenmatt estate have on the way it is decribed? Having been told that the Valency isthe only available version it sounds as though they've done what Complicite did, call it the original but ignore it as much as they could.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: AlanScott 04:09 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - ukpaul 07:43 am EDT 08/16/14

I don't know what strictures the Durrenment estate has on the way it is described. That's why I used the word "may" ("the producers may have no choice in the matter"). It may be that the Durrenmatt estate doesn't care, or it may be that the estate did insist on "based on." But I'd guess (though I'm not sure) that some language was agreed upon in the contract.

Actually, I doubt that the producers and writers really care whether it says "based on," "adapted from," "suggested by," or "came in the box of Cracker Jacks." (Well, the writers probably care about crediting Durrenmatt.)

Do you mean that it sounds like the creators of the musical have ignored what Valency did as much as possible or ignored the original play as much as possible?

And I'm just remembering that Durrenmatt and I share a birthday.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: ukpaul 04:40 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - AlanScott 04:09 pm EDT 08/16/14

It sounds as though they've made something that will work rather than following the Valency religiously. Knowing Doyle he'll have gone to the source material as his inspiration.

I, however, share a birthday with Dolly Parton (those are the breaks....)


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: garyd 05:02 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - ukpaul 04:40 pm EDT 08/16/14

Has anyone read Joel Agee's translation? I just remembered I have it….somewhere.
I share a birthday with Bill Clinton, Tipper Gore, and Coco Chanel. go figure.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: enoch10 11:07 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - garyd 05:02 pm EDT 08/16/14

i have. it's remarkably close to the bowles but a little tighter and as a result a bit better and i was a great fan of the bowles.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: garyd 11:54 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - enoch10 11:07 pm EDT 08/16/14

Thanks. I know I have it in an anthology from Univ. of Chicago press but I am not sure I have read it and won't for a while since it is located in a bookcase a bit distant from my current location.
My wife and I have seen the current production and, I think, it stays close to the themes of the play. That being said, it does contain an element of romance between Clair and Ill(the scene in the woods which also is in the play) which I interpret simply as an attempt to humanize both of them, a sense of regret, a sense of nostalgia, but definitely not an attempt by the current creative team to shift the focus to that of an epic love story. It remains an attempt to ironically meld musical theatre with the dark comedy of the original play. (Perhaps not successfully but a bold attempt.) I just read the Brantley review and his thoughts parallel mine.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: AlanScott 04:45 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - ukpaul 04:40 pm EDT 08/16/14

LOL!

Well, that means we're both Capricorns (although I'm right in the middle, which I'm told makes me very Capricorn).


reply to this message | reply to first message
"Applause"

Posted by: Delvino 07:21 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - AlanScott 01:53 am EDT 08/16/14

Certainly comes to mind this week. Most people assume it truly is "All About Eve," a version of the film, and of course Comden and Green were famously forbidden from using the Mankiewicz screenplay until late in the process; too late, so they didn't bother. It's based on the same Mary Orr story but only uses the overall plot premise. People are still startled Addison DeWitt makes no appearance. And needless to say, the book of the musical is never quoted like the iconic film; it's not remotely in the same league, to the chagrin of anyone contemplating a revival. It's an example of an adaptation of a movie that ultimately proves only "inspired by" a classic, raising expectation that are never met.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwise)

Posted by: actor103 02:02 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: If it's "based on" the play, then it is an adaptation (and it doesn't pretend otherwis ... - AlanScott 01:53 am EDT 08/16/14

Thank you SO much for that post. I loved reading that.

I do not know. I think this "based on", "adapted from", "Inspired by" musical is sort of its own thing. What do you really call it? I do not know or care. It just moves me deeply and labels have never served anyone or any culture well. Maybe, The Visit (musical) is just something unique unto itself. Dunno.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: Glitter 11:19 pm EDT 08/15/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - garyd 11:02 pm EDT 08/15/14

Their take on it is the human element: relationships and the choices we make. I think that's beautiful and effective way of telling the story, and just as valid as making a horror show.


reply to this message | reply to first message
Spoiler request

Posted by: ukpaul 07:46 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - Glitter 11:19 pm EDT 08/15/14

That sounds like the original, the central couple (and family?) are very real but those outside are less so.

Any chance of a spoiler? I'd love to know what the different ending is.


reply to this message | reply to first message
Spoiler

Posted by: Glitter 12:34 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: Spoiler request - ukpaul 07:46 am EDT 08/16/14

Formerly, Claire handed the Mayor a cheque. After the villagers celebrated, Claire re-enters with gray hair and widow's dress, leads a funeral procession with her entourage while the Mayor and the villagers's face flush with shame.

Now, there's no cheque. Claire has the eunuchs open the suitcases they've carried all night, and they're filled with money. They spread them across the front of the stage, the villagers dive in obscenely. stuffing their pockets and clothes with money. Claire re-enters with gray hair and widow's dress, leads a funeral procession with her entourage while the villagers exit the other way. The audience is left staring at the empty, decrepit, windy village, with money scattered about. Slow fade.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Spoiler

Posted by: enoch10 11:20 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: Spoiler - Glitter 12:34 pm EDT 08/16/14

i agree with (i think) ukpaul that this is a much better ending. i've never adapted a musical let alone one from a source as tricky as this. i could see where certain decisions would have to be made but some of them are coming at the expense of the ambiguity that serves the material well.

having a reaction like the one previously described as the mayor having at the end seemed outright wrong. for one thing that look should have come with the schoolteacher not the mayor since he was the only character to articulate - at least out loud - those ideas. but if he had it would have diminished the arc of the character. glad to hear it's been dropped.

this could be the production to make me change my mind about doyle. his PASSION has me about halfway there anyway.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Spoiler

Posted by: ukpaul 01:52 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: Spoiler - Glitter 12:34 pm EDT 08/16/14

Thanks, the new version sounds much better.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: BruceinIthaca 02:54 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - Glitter 11:19 pm EDT 08/15/14

Well, I just drove home from an eight hour round trip drive between Ithaca and Williamstown to see "The Visit" at tonight's (Friday's) performance. I thought it was an extraordinarily powerful "experience," on so many levels, many of which people less fatigued than I am at the moment have articulated (though my adrenalin kept me very alert all the way to the end of I-88!).

First and last: Chita Rivera. What an amazing performance. Such a study in stillness and the body's way of speaking its history in a minimal number of movements and gestures. Of the six or so shows I've seen her in, I think the acting in this one may have been her greatest challenge. I know the show was originally conceived for Lansbury--whom I love as much I do Rivera--and she would have brought a different kind of energy and power to it, but Rivera made you believe in the younger self still contained within. I agree that the pas de deux was a magnificent dance--keenly choreographed and beautifully rendered. And, of course, Rivera brings all her decades as a dancer, singer, actor to the role, and she showed how any performer adapts to the passage of time and coming of age. Her final appearance just stunned me. I won't say anymore about it to avoid spoiling anything.

It IS an adaptation. An adaptation always implies change--I studied adaptation with folks like Robert Breen and Frank Galati and while they remained "true in their fashion" to any text they adapted, there was also always room for their own point of view on the text. A few years ago, I was at a conference on disability and performance and, in my talk, I mentioned "The Visit" and Claire. The organizer had worked as a dramaturge on an avant-garde production and, as part of his work, found out that Durrenmatt had originally had a male Zachanassian returning home for revenge, but that, because of the troupe he was working with, he shifted it to a woman and the whole love/shame plot emerged. BTW, D's widow would never allow a man to play Claire, so one company had a woman present as Claire, but had the role acted by a man. Fascinating. Adaptation does not mean literal translation--it doesn't mean that in biological evolution. Things change. This adaptation focused more on the intimacy of the Claire-Anton relationship, and the townspeople became the social and political frame in which it was played out. It is a kind of dance of death. I know the production has been described as Brechtian, and I think that's apt. The actors both were and were not the characters (as the stylized makeup and costuming suggested to me) at the same time. In some ways, they reminded me a bit of the townsfolk in Shirley Jackson's story "The Lottery" or those engaged in a kind of pagan take on the Passionplay. Their work was disciplined and lacking in any attempts at egotism, at least to me.

I have not seen any earlier version, so I have nothing to compare with. I thought the score functioned well--less generally hummable than most of Kander and Ebb, but if one leaves the theatre after this show humming the catchy melodies, something has gone terribly wrong--with the production, or the audience, or that place where both meet. I will remember the 11 o'clock equivalent "Love and Only Love," for its somewhat Weillian-tune is a haunting summary of the play's themes and, in a sense, the leading lady's life in the theatre. Rees took a bit of getting used to for me (in part because I saw him last in "The Winslow Boy," where he was not being a terribly good husband to my old friend Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio). His characterization verged on madness at times, which worked in this adaptation--his final choices in some ways are a madman's demonstration of love.

I think there were enough nods to the grotesque and German expressionistic horror films (the eunuchs, the omnipresent coffin) to honor that element of the original. And I did find myself thinking in political and social terms as I watched the more intimate scenes--the idea that an individual's desire for revenge against another particular individual can only succeed when the economics (in the broadest sense) favor the individual. And that we, as humans, seem to rationalize inhuman behavior when it suits our own collective and individual needs. Not to be even more cliched than I may already have been, but it made me think of the feminist motto, "the personal is political." And vice versa.

BTW, the "obstructed seat" became a nonissue. I would have missed the visuals of the trio on the catwalk (Rudi and the eunuchs), but it turned out that the person next to me had been split up from her son, who was sitting in the front row of the orchestra. I asked if they would like to sit together--they were eager to, so I was front row, a little house left. I know, I know, this act embodies the very Ayn Randian philosophy I abhor in theory--but it did make a family happy to be able to be next to each other and it made me less OCD about worrying about missing anything. The box seat would have been perfectly fine.

I'd never been to WTF--and I don't recommend doing it the way I did (I did it partly on impulse and because I knew I would be going solo, so the fun of planning a festive weekend in the Berkshires was not there for me)--but I thought it a very lovely theatre, and the production values equal to those on Broadway.

Now to bed.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: BruceinIthaca 12:43 am EDT 08/17/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - BruceinIthaca 02:54 am EDT 08/16/14

BTW, I realize it is "Love and Love Alone," and, after a long sleep I see how the phrase "Love Alone" has interesting multiple meanings. The memory of the show grows deeper for me as I think about it, and as I try to describe it to friends.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: enoch10 11:25 pm EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - BruceinIthaca 02:54 am EDT 08/16/14

thank you for that detailed and thoughtful report. man, i want this to come in so bad.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: actor103 11:29 am EDT 08/16/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - BruceinIthaca 02:54 am EDT 08/16/14

Thanks. I am re-thinking the "adaptation" issue. When you reference "biological evolution," in terms of the words meaning, I start to change my understanding. Anyway, hmmm, maybe adaptation is exactly what this is. You seem to have a more comprehensive understanding of the term, than I. Have to think about it but what you are saying sounds right. Not really sure why it matters to me. I guess it is because I do not want people to see the show with blinders on and go into the musical, expecting to see the same themes and dramatic structure as the play. If that is what they are looking for, I can understand why they would be disapointed.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show

Posted by: garyd 11:36 pm EDT 08/15/14
In reply to: re: The Visit at WTF: my take on the show - Glitter 11:19 pm EDT 08/15/14

Okay, thanks. I agree it is not a horror show. It is, I believe, a very dark comedy full of themes related to politics and revenge and capitalism, and pent up desire that the author feels leads to greed and base human behavior.


reply to this message | reply to first message


All That Chat is intended for the discussion of theatre news and opinion
subject to the terms and conditions of the Terms of Service. (Please take all off-topic discussion to private email.)

Please direct technical questions/comments to webmaster@talkinbroadway.com and policy questions to TBAdmin@talkinbroadway.com.

[ Home | On the Rialto | The Siegel Column | Cabaret | Tony Awards | Book Reviews | Great White Wayback Machine ]
[ Broadway Reviews | Barbara and Scott: The Two of Clubs | Sound Advice | Restaurant Revue | Off Broadway | Funding Talkin' Broadway ]
[ Broadway 101 | Spotlight On | Talkin' Broadway | On the Boards | Regional | Talk to Us! | Search Talkin' Broadway ]

Terms of Service
[ © 1997 - 2014 www.TalkinBroadway.com, Inc. ]

Time to render: 0.506469 seconds.