| re: A CHORUS LINE | |
| Posted by: Chazwaza 06:27 pm EST 02/05/25 | |
| In reply to: A CHORUS LINE - JereNYC 03:48 pm EST 02/05/25 | |
|
|
|
| I've never quite understood this take... and to me it shows a weird and pretty significant lack of respect or perhaps understanding of the creative work of the director, choreographer and even designers. I don't think shows should be frozen in time. But to me this is like saying "why see this play, they're saying the same words they said 50 years ago", or "is it STILL set in the 70s? Sigh, I've seen that already." With the rare shows like A Chorus Line where the direction and staging is part of the fabric of the show, it's almost like rewriting the book to do it without it. And maybe they will... they do it with so many other shows. So why not re-set ACL in current day, and re-write the book. And it's not always so wrong, I could certainly see there being something relevant and interesting in producing A Chorus Line in modern day costumes and finding subtle changes to some of the word choices in dialogue that are not used anymore today, and references to pop culture of the pre-1975 world that the characters make. Are the struggles of passionate workhorse theater artists and dancers so different now? Even if we could pretend not to notice all the ways it would be completely different if ACL were conceived and written today about today. But also... the show is the show. Not only can we say "do the show they wrote", you can also rightly say "several new generations exist who could never see this show, why is it bad to give them a chance to see it as it was... as it was then was an essential part of what made it so incredible." It's not that I wouldn't want to see ACL with a new vision, or WSS* with a new vision... but A) i think in many ways the direction/staging is as much part of the writing as the written words and notes, and B) what if the new production on Broadway where they do let go of the original direction/staging/design ... sucks? I mean... what there are not a lot of geniuses working these days, and I do think that Jerome Robbins was a genius, and I think Michael Bennett was a genius, and I think Bob Fosse was a genius. *WSS is different because there's a brilliant film of WSS that not only captures Robbins' choreography that's so inherent to the piece, but was co-directed by him (and is very popular and won Best Picture, etc, cementing it in the culture). If A Chorus Line had that, I'd be less worried about the impression and new and bad/misguided vision applied to it on Broadway would do. It's so hard and so expensive to mount something on broadway these days... I can't help but be afraid of how unremarkable and how disappointing or misguided another director/choreographers vision could be in attempting to reimagine the show or have a "take". So I'm quite torn. Obviously a musical has to stand on its own. But there is a reality to some musicals and how they're formed and born, and how much the direction is part of what it is and how/why it works, how/why what's on the page is on the page. I also have no doubt that there will be a re-invented Chorus Line some day, but I don't know if Broadway currently has someone brilliant and exciting enough to be the first person to reinvent it on Broadway. PS i think it's a wonder (and a shame) that we've never gotten a revival of Follies that recreates Prince/Bennett's work, let alone Aronson or Klotz's design and costumes. I think that's honestly one of the few shows where the direction/staging/design was inherently part of the show, and I think the show has never been as good without it (even though I think the show itself is brilliant and I think one of the best musicals ever written). |
|
| reply | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | A CHORUS LINE - JereNYC 03:48 pm EST 02/05/25 |
| Next: | re: The Rink: Has there been a major revival? - RufusRed 11:41 am EST 02/04/25 |
| Thread: | |
Time to render: 0.014993 seconds.