Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: MERRILY: How much do reviews affects our views? | |
| Posted by: pagates 10:35 am EST 02/24/19 | |
| In reply to: MERRILY: How much do reviews affects our views? - Zelgo 09:35 pm EST 02/23/19 | |
|
|
|
| I also wondered at the time whether that was a factor in the audience response when I saw Friday. I’d never seen Merrily, though I was familiar with the story, its history and its music. I had very much been looking forward to seeing it … until Green's review deflated my anticipation. Reading Sergius concerned me even more as I greatly respect his judgment. As usual what he said is very helpful (though I think I liked it more than he). The book seems decidedly problematic; I can’t judge whether this production exacerbates or resolves any of its weaknesses, never having seen a different production. But I affirm that its streamlining and focus on the story makes what's happening clear. The people I saw it with who were most disappointed were people who had seen other productions. I confess: I loved the Hytner Carousel; I thought it transformed that show to a deep level of greatness. I endorse Sondheim’s view; I too love actors who can sing. So whatever vocal deficiencies the cast may have, they were not a problem for me. I also love this Merrily. I encourage others to see it. It’s an absorbingly interesting depiction of ideas. It boldly communicates the challenges of lives intersecting around friendship, love, work and play. It speaks thoughtfully and movingly about the shifting sands of hopes, dreams and expectations as they surface and sink in the characters’ abilities, talents and needs. I suspect its conceptual thickness plays a large role in what makes it such a difficult show to mount. It reminded me a bit of Company in being more like a staged/musicalized concept draped around a story rather than a story that illuminates concepts, most particularly in song — which, as others suggest, given the thinness of this production may undermine some of its power. But that said, this very thinness added a highly valuable human dimension. No, it’s not perfect, but it is deeply engaging — at levels that much of what I’ve seen in recent years is not. It has weaknesses, but it still connects and awakens the viewer with interior realities in a meaningful way. |
|
| reply to this message |
| JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM: One Theory... | |
| Posted by: Vivian 07:42 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
| In reply to: re: MERRILY: How much do reviews affects our views? - pagates 10:35 am EST 02/24/19 | |
|
|
|
| HI, I have a theory of why Jesse Green hated the OUTSTANDING Fiasco MWRA.I think Jesse is an AUDITORY learner, as opposed to a VISUAL learner. This is why he loved the musically exceptional original MWRA, which was a VISUAL trainwreck: 28 actors standing around looking lost, like they were waiting for a train in Grand Central Station, and an eyesore of a set and costumes. It was painful to watch, but if you had your eyes closed, BRILLIANT. Meanwhile, this Fiasco show is less musically accomplished while narratively and visually clear and very heartfelt and elegantly executed. This is one theory that would explain Jesse Green's misguided, wrongheaded review. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM IS NOT A PROBLEM. MERRILY IS THE PROBLEM | |
| Posted by: NewtonUK 09:35 am EST 02/25/19 | |
| In reply to: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM: One Theory... - Vivian 07:42 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
|
|
|
| Well, maybe. I love Fiasco. But the Fiasco-ising of MWRA is not the main culprit here. The culprit is the book. No one has every wrestled it into shape. I saw the original. I saw the Donmar Warehouse. I saw the recent London revival. I saw a regional theatre production. I saw it in concert. I saw this production. The book sinks them all. As the book sinks CANDIDE, and sinks FOLLIES, and sinks SHE LOVES ME ... I could go on. (although the latter is really the problem of not spending the money to license the film, rather than the source of the film. Scene by scebe, the film tells thestory better, and would have made a better musical) We ALL want to love MERRILY. Every time we see it we think there will be a revelation! And somewhere about the half hour mark our hearts sink, cuz the book just doesnt work, no matter how much they tinker. Great score lost in a mediocre book. The story of so many Broadway shows. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| They had the rights to the movie | |
| Last Edit: AlanScott 06:30 pm EST 02/25/19 | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 06:30 pm EST 02/25/19 | |
| In reply to: re: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM IS NOT A PROBLEM. MERRILY IS THE PROBLEM - NewtonUK 09:35 am EST 02/25/19 | |
|
|
|
| They absolutely had the rights to the movie. They worked primarily from the movie. MGM didn't want to give them the rights at first, and it had nothing to do with money. It had to do with Lawrence Kasha not being a big enough producer. When Hal Prince came on board, they got the rights to the movie with no problem, but they'd been working from it all along. All the press releases I've seen leading up to the production mention only the movie. It seems that there was some sort of contractual thing that made it necessary for them to list only the author of the original play in the credits. Have you seen or read the play? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM IS NOT A PROBLEM. MERRILY IS THE PROBLEM | |
| Posted by: larry13 11:26 am EST 02/25/19 | |
| In reply to: re: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM IS NOT A PROBLEM. MERRILY IS THE PROBLEM - NewtonUK 09:35 am EST 02/25/19 | |
|
|
|
| I never saw "The Shop Around the Corner" so I won't argue with you that it tells the story better than SHE LOVES ME. But to lump that musical's book with the others you cite and state that it "sinks SHE LOVES ME" is not only ridiculous but it makes anyone question your whole post(which otherwise does make a very good point). SHE LOVES ME is considered by many as a perfect musical and not just because of the great Bock/Harnick score. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM IS NOT A PROBLEM. MERRILY IS THE PROBLEM | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 05:06 pm EST 02/25/19 | |
| In reply to: re: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM IS NOT A PROBLEM. MERRILY IS THE PROBLEM - larry13 11:26 am EST 02/25/19 | |
|
|
|
| Agreed. The book to She Loves Me is wonderful. Plus, this shouldn't be about comparing a musical to its source, as much as it should be about looking at the musical on its own terms. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM IS NOT A PROBLEM. MERRILY IS THE PROBLEM | |
| Posted by: ryhog 02:38 pm EST 02/25/19 | |
| In reply to: re: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM IS NOT A PROBLEM. MERRILY IS THE PROBLEM - larry13 11:26 am EST 02/25/19 | |
|
|
|
| I had the same reaction as you. We all get to have our opinions of every show, but sometimes such expressions cannot bear their own weight. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM: One Theory... | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 08:58 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
| In reply to: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM: One Theory... - Vivian 07:42 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
|
|
|
| As someone who loved the original production, I guess I'm also an auditory learner. :) I think by the time it opened, it looked just fine. Not brilliant, but fine. (A few of the critics did feel that way, too, for whatever that's worth.) And the cast was superb, and Prince's direction had both detail and throughline. Was it perfect? No. Were there places where, even after the great improvements to musical staging put in by Larry Fuller, the musical staging looked underdone because there were limits to what the cast could do? Sure. But the strengths far outweighed the weaknesses, at least for this observer. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM: One Theory... | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 08:57 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
| In reply to: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM: One Theory... - Vivian 07:42 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
|
|
|
| Meanwhile, this Fiasco show is less musically accomplished.... I can't, for the life of me, understand this kind of excuse. It's a musical. It needs to sound good. There are other things that need to be good about it too, but I don't see the point of a musical that doesn't sound musically accomplished. They could have done the Kaufman and Hart play, after all. If you're seeing a complex, verbose play, and it's clear that none of the actors are skilled in speaking their lines, would you give them the benefit of the doubt because the show was "narratively and visually clear and very heartfelt and elegantly executed"? No, I think you'd leave after intermission if there was one. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| The theory of learner's having different dominate modalities has been disproven. | |
| Posted by: tmdonahue (tmdonahue@yahoo.com) 07:56 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
| In reply to: JESSE GREEN'S PROBLEM: One Theory... - Vivian 07:42 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
|
|
|
| Even if education schools continue to promote the idea. | |
| Link | Link to my latest book "Playing for Prizes" |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: The theory of Lerner's having different dominant modalities has been disproven. | |
| Last Edit: Chromolume 11:46 pm EST 02/25/19 | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 11:46 pm EST 02/25/19 | |
| In reply to: The theory of learner's having different dominate modalities has been disproven. - tmdonahue 07:56 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
|
|
|
| Lerner wrote the lyrics. It would have been Loewe or Lane (among others) who wrote the dominant modalities, depending on the show. :-) |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| I love you, Chromolume! | |
| Posted by: showtunetrivia 01:13 pm EST 02/26/19 | |
| In reply to: re: The theory of Lerner's having different dominant modalities has been disproven. - Chromolume 11:46 pm EST 02/25/19 | |
|
|
|
| I needed that. Laura, who also loves antibiotics |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: The theory of learner's having different dominate modalities has been disproven. | |
| Posted by: Vivian 09:53 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
| In reply to: The theory of learner's having different dominate modalities has been disproven. - tmdonahue 07:56 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
|
|
|
| Thanks for plugging your book, which has NOTHING to do with the topic under discussion. And for someone who knows so much about education and the latest educational ideology and scholarship, you miss-spelled "learners". Just sayin'. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: The theory of learner's having different dominate modalities has been disproven. | |
| Posted by: ryhog 11:57 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
| In reply to: re: The theory of learner's having different dominate modalities has been disproven. - Vivian 09:53 pm EST 02/24/19 | |
|
|
|
| There are no rules but rule # 1: if you're gonna correct someone's spelling, make damn sure you have spelled everything correctly yourself. LOL |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.032921 seconds.