| the Sondheim factor + Merrily's setting is more popular + i think Merrily's issues fascinate more then nullify more than M&M's | |
| Last Edit: Chazwaza 02:49 pm EDT 06/16/22 | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 02:45 pm EDT 06/16/22 | |
| In reply to: Is Mack & Mabel over? - Zelgo 08:31 am EDT 06/16/22 | |
|
|
|
| The silent film era is such a niche thing for audiences these days, and having it be a big part of the show and executing that on stage I think turns a lot of people off. It's like even if they do it well, it's not going to engage or impress most audiences nor is it going to fix the issues with the book. And I think Merrily not only has issues that are fascinating to people, it has a setting that isn't niche ... and it's benefited immeasurably by it being a Sondheim score. They are in fashion, and give a director and cast soooo much to work with/on, more than a Herman one.. as a general assessment that isn't entirely fair but I do think it's true. Another things is I think the sadness and tragic elements of the relationships and lives of the characters in Merrily are set up to help us reflect on our own lives and choices and relationships to our dreams and our younger selves (or future older selves). M&M just tells a sad love story that ends tragically, just to tell it. That's fine for me, but for a lot of audiences they just don't want to see a zippy romantic fun classic Herman musical with that kind of story. Also I think people, probably rightly, think they need a splashy production to sell M&M, given the world the show is set in. And I am sure that helps. And it some ways hurts because the more it feels like a fun old school musical the more many audiences get confused when it starts getting dark. Merrily doesn't need any flash or sets per se, and I think directors and actors see it much more as an interesting "actors musical" in a way they would never see M&M which gives the only juicy acting roles to the two leads, and requires major dance numbers and chorus, etc. I absolutely LOVE Mack & Mabel and would buy a ticket to any production -- I've never been given then chance (I wasn't in NYC for the week Encores did it)... And I think Merrily is a brilliant show... in the ORIGINAL version. Frankly, I would sooner by a ticket to Mack & Mabel than the licensed version of Merrily. I've seen many productions of it at various levels and it never works for me, not because the show can't work but because in trying to fix it they broke it quite a bit more - surface level and under the skin of the show, - than if they had just left the original version alone and gone to therapy. The original was very flawed but the script and score has a kind of lightening in a bottle aspect for those it works for, and now the whole show just has a mild wattage - it's fine, it's lights up a space I guess... but... not every show needs to "work" for everyone, sometimes writers just writer what they want, which they very much did, and it's amazing to some and bad to others and curious to others. Letting the straight-to-broadway original production, directed by someone having a creative breakdown who sabotaged the entire thing, be the determining experience for if audiences or critics would ever like or get the show they wrote is absolutely bonkers and unfair to the show, which actually never got a production that served it enough to be used to judge if the show as they wrote it could work and why/how. I have way less experience with the text and history and revisions of Mack & Mabel, but I'd be very glad to see even a staged reading of the original version of the show. Or the revised, hell. Anything. The score is so good, and I find the story compelling even if very sad and almost not worthy telling. Ha. |
|
| reply | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | re: Is Mack & Mabel over? - lanky 04:33 pm EDT 06/16/22 |
| Next: | re: Is Mack & Mabel over? - PlayWiz 10:55 am EDT 06/16/22 |
| Thread: | |
Time to render: 0.008145 seconds.