On the Town

It's a very busy season in the Seattle theatre scene.  Of particular note right now is the Seattle Celebrates Bernstein Festival, which includes the current run of On the Town at the 5th Avenue Theatre.  

On the Town, from the golden age of American musical theatre, hit Broadway in 1944 during the height of World War II, is a humorous look at three wartime Navy sailors spending 24-hours on shore leave in New York City.  But really, that's just a simple plot to string the music and comedy together.  Perhaps that's too critical of the plot, however, because oddly I wasn't disappointed.  The plot was more than sufficient to provide a solid canvas for the fantastic Leonard Bernstein musical score and Jerome Robbins choreography.  

In fact, On the Town was Bernstein's very first musical theatre composition, a full decade before his most popular musical score for West Side Story.  But you can already see the Bernstein and Robbins touch coming together in On the Town.  

The music was understandably fantastic, and well-performed.  The dance, while lacking at times, was adequate, though I could do without the classic 8-minute dance numbers that seem to go on forever.   

But really where this show shines is the script.  It's rare to see so many non-stop laughs in a Broadway musical.  No doubt owing to the time in which it was written, people needed something to laugh about.  And this musical gave it to them in abundance.  

New York, New York, it's a hell of a town.  

And as for my rating:

Script:  4 stars - Plot was simple, yet effective.  With enough comedy to make anyone enjoy it.

Music:  4 stars - It's no West Side Story, and only a couple of songs could I really find myself singing spontaneously.  

Cast:  4 stars - The three leads were fantastic, with an even more outstanding chorus.  Dance choreography wasn't quite up to the perfection you'd expect from a top-notch Broadway production though.  

Technical:  4 stars - It always impresses me how the 5th Ave can produce such amazing productions.  A credit to an amazing local stage staff.  

Overall:  4 stars - Definitely worth seeing!  

In the Glenn Miller mood...

Been a while since I've taken the time to make a show update, but we'll give two in rapid succession here.  First, Saturday night I went to see the Glenn Miller Orchestra at Benaroya Hall.  I have to admit, I wasn't expecting the world, in fact I was expecting to be bored by about intermission.  But they were absolutely fantastic!

Not only were they fantastic musicians, they were brilliant entertainers.  Not a huge surprise... I certainly have always been a big fan of Glenn Miller and his music, but little did I expect one fantastic song after another for 2 solid hours.

On a note of personal taste, big band music is far more to my liking than straight-ahead or bebop jazz music.  As much as I like jazz, I struggle through some jazz bands' 10+ minute long songs with endless improvisational verses.  Fortunately, big band music tends to finds its origins in American popular music of the 1940s... and the songs tend to be mercifully short.  (Just hypothesizing, but a 78rpm record could handle about 3 minutes of music on a side, so that would probably keep the popular songs limited to about that long.)

Dreamgirls


Last Wednesday I went and saw Dreamgirls at the Paramount.  Despite it being a nearly 30-year old musical (it premiered back in 1981), and a recent movie (which I didn't see), I knew absolutely nothing about this show going into it except a very superficial premise.  As is typically the case with musicals based on a genre of music or a particular band or bands, the so-called "jukebox musicals", I was expecting decent music with a tenuous if not non-existent plot line.  Wow, was I surprised again!  Not only did this musical have fantastic music, not to mention some amazing singers, it actually had a captivating plot!

The obvious allusions to Diana Ross, the Supremes, and James Brown provided a fascinating connection of the plot to 1960's and 70's music history, its successes and its scandals.

It's been a while since I've been able to give a solid rating here, but based on my standard system:

Cast: 4 stars - Brilliant singers and actors.
Script: 4 stars - Decent plot.  Enough to hold the music together and keep me captivated.  I'd call that a success.
Music:  3 stars - Better performed than the music itself was.
Technical: 4 stars - This wasn't a Broadway spectacle, but it was well done and pleasing to watch.
Overall:  4 stars - Hard to complain too much.

Wicked

I know, I know... I still haven't posted an update after my Florida trip, but that will have to wait until I'm inspired again (which by my calculations will be about 3 weeks from never). But in the meantime, I need to do a musical review of Wicked.

Wicked made its way back to the Paramount this year after a 3 year hiatus, but this time with an incredible month-long run. Avid readers may recall all the way back to one of my inaugural musical reviews from from September 2006, where I briefly graced the show with my coveted 5-star rating. It's exciting to see it again to see what I may have missed the first time.

I actually attended opening night of the Seattle stop on the tour, which if I see correctly, is actually the first stop on the entire tour. The performance was not without its share of hiccups, but overall it's still hard to beat such an outstanding collection of music and an amazing performance. That said, this performance wasn't quite as brilliant as I recall. That's not to say it still doesn't receive my 5-star rating, or that I wouldn't go see it again next time it comes to town.

Most notably, the ensemble seemed a bit on the weak side musically. I fully expect this to improve over the course of the run, but it was a bit rough at points. Also, the role of Glinda was performed so over-the-top that I actually found her to be somewhat annoying. Musically weaker than I've previously seen (and certainly weaker than the outstanding performance by Kristen Chenoweth in the original Broadway production), and just overacted. Fortunately, these minor weaknesses in the performance were more than compensated by the phenomenal performance of Elphaba, which was as good as any performance I've seen or heard.

My ratings for this performance:

Script: 5-stars - still a hard show to beat.

Music: 5-stars - I don't think there's a bad song in the show, compared to a typical musical where you maybe get a couple showstopping numbers and a lot of fill.

Cast: 4-stars - The only weakness in the production, but minor at that.

Technical: 5-stars - Still an amazing set and a true theatrical spectacle.

Overall: 5-stars - You should still see this any chance you get. Still in that elite class of musicals to receive my 5-star rating along with Avenue Q and RENT.

Wicked continues to play at the Paramount in Seattle through October 4th.

RENT

Wednesday night brought another performance of RENT to the Paramount. It's been just over 2 years ago since the last time it came to Seattle. [You can see my review of that performance here.] Making this the 5th performance of RENT I've seen, I will start by saying this is quite certainly the best performance I've ever seen overall.

This tour includes the two pioneers of the original Broadway cast, with Anthony Rapp and Adam Pascal as Mark and Roger. I have very little to complain about here. These are the voices most people will recognize from the original cast album, and and the benchmark by which all other actors since have been compared. Of course, they probably have performed these parts more than any other actors, but they still put a bit of differences from what I've seen and heard in the past. The only part I slightly questioned was in Another Day, Roger (Adam Pascal) seemed to be channelling the lead singer from the B-52's with his recitative chanting. I was amused only because I've heard him so many times on the album I didn't quite expect it.

The vast majority of this touring cast had played these roles in some previous incarnation of the show, either on Broadway or a previous tour. One notable exception is the role of Mimi, played by some girl who was apparently a contestant on American Idol this season. All I can say about her performance is: overacted and underwhelming. Not only was I unimpressed, it really stuck out in such an outstanding cast top to bottom.

Overall, absolutely incredible. This didn't have an of the issues that plagued previous performances I've seen. It did clock in at about 2:30 + intermission, which flew by like it was maybe an hour.

Ratings (which should be no surprise):

Music: 5 stars - Brilliant music, and the band performed it fantastically.

Cast: 5 stars - Even Mimi can't bring this cast's rating down.

Technical: 4 stars - This isn't a theatrical spectacle. But outstanding as it was.

Overall: 5 stars - One of my must-see musicals, and a performance not to be missed.

Cats

Last night I saw the musical Cats at the Paramount.

WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT?!

Folks, I go to musicals for great music, and usually an entertaining show to go along with it. This show had neither.

The musical originally opened in London in 1981. The music was probably bleeding-edge at the time: almost entirely synthesized. What a waste!

Of course, the plot line... oh, wait, there isn't one. The entire script (with a couple of exceptions) are taken from some poems by T.S. Eliot. Somehow this became a legendary musical still making national and international tours after nearly 30 years. You've got to be kidding me.

To cap it off, it contained the staple of classic musicals, the one thing I abhor more than anything else in musical theatre, the utterly painful presentation -- the 10-minute dance number.

The rest is a waste of space, here's my ratings:

Music: 2 stars - replace the synthesizer with real music and you might make 3.

Technical: 2 stars - entertaining set with lots to look at, but nothing more.

Cast: 3 stars - adept and generally impressive, too bad they were in THIS musical.

Script: 1 star - spare me

Overall: 2 stars - I do not need to see this again.

The Lion King

Last night I attended the touring production of The Lion King at the Paramount.  While this show has been around for a while now, this is actually the first time I've seen it.  While some shows have brilliant music (which tends to be weighted much more highly in my reviews than other factors), this show definitely had what I would consider one of the greatest theatrical experiences I've seen.  

As I think back to when The Lion King animated movie originally was released--which turns out to be 1994 believe it or not--I can't tell you how many times I've seen the movie over the past 15 years.  I'm pretty sure I have the original movie soundtrack on CD somewhere around, though haven't listened to it in ages.  But if you're expecting the musical to have the same music as the movie, you're partially mistaken.  Sure the big numbers from the movie are still there, but a handful of new material has also been added, which frankly contributes a lot to the musical production.  Obviously the story line is mangled a bit for the stage, cutting out some filler from the movie and adding some new material to tie up the loose ends.  

I so often use the term "theatrical spectacle" to describe shows that may not have the greatest music or story lines, but more than make up for it in the visual stage experience.  This show is the rare package deal, with great music, a reasonable story line, and the show to go with it.  It's no surprise, given that Disney produced the stage show, that the experience is as amazing as it is.  As a connaisseur of the finest theme park attractions Disney has to offer, think of this show as its own 2.5-hour ride that they delivered to the theatre.  

Despite all of the great things I have to say about it, I can't say it's the best musical I've seen, or even one that I'd choose above others to see again if given the option.  In this case, it's definitely a show I'd say everyone should see once, but now I've seen it and don't really need to see it again.  Not that I wouldn't, but I wouldn't be chomping at the bit to see it.  

Onto the ratings...

Music - 5 Stars - The songs were great, and you could listen to them again.

Cast - 4 Stars - Rafiki, Scar and the young Simba were definitely the high points.  

Technical - 5 Stars - The mark of a true Broadway spectacle

Story - 4 Stars - It is what it is

Overall - 4 Stars - But you should see it anyway. :) 

Broadway at the Paramount 2009

The Paramount announced their 2009 Broadway Season last week, and it looks like it should be another interesting one:  

The Lion King (February/March) - I missed this last time it was in town.  By all accounts this will be a Broadway spectacle beyond all measure.  Looking forward to this one.  

Cats (April) - This is a one-week engagement, not part of the regular season.  Another I've never seen, but tempting to get tickets to this one since it is indeed a Broadway classic now.  

Frost/Nixon (May) - Every so often they throw a non-musical play into the mix, and this is the most recent.  From the synopsis:  "Direct from Broadway, Frost/Nixon tackles the question:  How did David Frost, a famous British talk show host with a playboy reputation, elicit the apology that the rest of the world was waiting to hear from former President Richard Nixon?"  Tony Award nominated, should be interesting, if also from a historical prespective.  

RENT (June) - Yet another return engagement, but this time Adam Pascal and Anthony Rapp, from the original Broadway cast, return to reprise their roles.  I always say this is a must see everytime it comes to town, and this is definitely no exception.  

Wicked (September/October) -  Returning again after just two seasons ago, but this time for an entire month.  This received an "unconditional 5 out of 5 stars" in my previous abbreviated review, and you absolutely must see this when it comes to town.  If you don't like it, there's something wrong with you.  

August: Osage County (October) - Highly praised, yet I've never heard of it.  Probably because once again, it's not a musical.  Read your own reviews.  

Fiddler on the Roof (November/December) - Numerous classic songs in this, from "Tradition" to "If I Were a Rich Man".  Hard to argue with this one as another great one.  

Should turn out to be a heck of a season, I'd say.  

Phantom of the Opera

Avid readers used to my reviews of great musicals you've never heard of will appreciate the refreshing change as last night I went to one of the most popular musicals of all time, Phantom of the Opera.  It may come as a surprise to some that I've actually never seen Phantom on stage, though am very familiar with it through all of its pop-culture ties and of course the movie that was made a few years back.  

Since most everyone (at least anyone who cares) knows the general idea of the show, I'll spare a lengthy review and instead evaluate this production, with the caveat that I have no past productions to compare it to.  

As expected, another theatrical spectacle.  This one even more so than most, as it seemed the scenery extended into the entire theatre.  The Paramount actually made a spectacular accompaniment to the on-stage sets, both having similar architectural styling.  The famous chandelier fit perfectly into the theatre's decor.  I must say there was almost a fluid quality to the production, as rarely was there a moment something wasn't moving on stage, whether the scenery or props changing or stuff appearing and disappearing off stage.  

And of course, Andrew Lloyd Webber's score with so many songs that have become ingrained in the popular music genre.  We were treated (some might disagree) to one of the understudies performance as The Phantom, which was an amazing performance nonetheless.  I was not disappointed.

Not much more to add, so on to the ratings:

Cast: 4 stars - Just because.

Script:  4 stars - "From the messed up mind of ALW..."

Technical: 5 stars - This is the kind of show that makes a Broadway musical...

Music:  5 stars - Too much good music not to be pleased.

Overall: 4 stars - This is a great performance.  I'd see it again, but I'd also choose other musicals over this one.  

Shrek: The Musical

The latest show to make its World Premiere in Seattle before heading to Broadway is Shrek: The Musical.  The show has been running at the 5th Avenue Theatre since August 14th in preview performances to work any kinks out and fine tune the show in response to audience feedback, with the official opening set for September 10th.  

The show seemed pretty solid, though had a bit of a slow start to me.  Towards the end of the first act it was really up to speed and the second act was outstanding.  

Make no mistake, this is a true Broadway spectacle, beyond all measure.  

Just stepping into the theatre, the entire stage, as if by magic, had been transformed into a swamp.  Dramatic set changes, brilliantly vivid scenery, and everything else you'd expect from a first-rate Broadway production were present.  For this alone, the musical is worth every penny.  

You needn't look far to find the humor in this production.  From Lord Farquad's hilariously diminutive depiction, to the jokes interjected in nearly every line of the script, you'll be laughing from beginning to end.  Though I could have done without some of the cliche one-liners scattered throughout, there were plenty of fresh and appropriate lines to make up for it.  Additionally, as has become a standard in animated films, you'll find plenty of adult humor that will go right over the kids heads, which is a good thing because there were far more young people at the performance than most I attend.  I especially enjoyed the subtle references to other recent Broadway musicals, including "Wicked", "Avenue Q", and "The Lion King".  No doubt there were others, but these three were unmistakable if you've seen any of those shows.  

The music was, well, unmemorable.  While there were a few distinct tunes, well-performed by the cast and the surprisingly large orchestra, the overall music seemed rather flat.  In fact, I don't recall any siginficantly showstopping numbers that one might expect in any musical production.  Yet somehow that didn't significantly detract from the quality of the show.  The music was still very appropriate to the theme of the show, integrated well with the dialogue, and didn't interfere with the rest of the production. 

I have no doubt that this will make a huge run on Broadway and probably get several Tony nominations.  As for my ratings:

Cast:  4 stars - A great collection of proven Broadway stars.

Script:  4 stars - Hard to argue with a proven formula, but well adapted to the stage.

Technical: 6 stars - A rarity that I would exceed my 5-star scale, but there's no better way to describe it.  The lighting, scenery, and entire package was nothing short of spectacular.  

Music:  3 stars - But don't be disappointed by that. 

Costumes:  5 stars - Adding this category, because it deserves special mention.

Overall: 4 stars - I would definitely give this my highest recommendation for the first time seeing it, but it doesn't have the repeatability that I would demand from musicals that receive my coveted 5-star rating.  

Shrek plays in Seattle through September 21st before starting previews on Broadway this November.  Definitely worth seeing while it's here.

A Chorus Line

Slightly delayed review of A Chorus Line, which I saw on Wednesday night...

One... the legendary showstopping number from the show does a good job of describing the show as a whole.

One... act, with no intermission.
One... scene, the entire show takes place on an audition stage, no set changes necessary.
One... costume change, to prepare for the big finale, that's it.

I'll step out on my own limb here and say that the music isn't the main reason to see this show. A Chorus Line won a Pulitzer Prize for Drama, something that only seven musicals have ever achieved. As the Pulitzer claims to be awarded "for a distinguished play by an American author, preferably original in its source and dealing with American life," the award is not unjustified. The depth of character development is rarely matched in musical theatre. This show is a brilliant play, with associated music. The story is brilliant, the music is present.

A Chorus Line made its mark as the longest running musical of its time, playing from July 1975 through April 1990. That mark has since been eclipsed by Cats, Les Miserables, and the still running Phantom. I say with confidence that this show would not have such a run if it opened today. Though despite that, it was an oddly compelling story that really captured your attention.

As for the ratings:

Cast: 3 stars - perhaps unfairly due to my lack of enthusiasm for the musical.
Script: 4 stars
Music: 2 stars - I am not a fan.
Technical: N/A - What's there to be technical? There's no set, there's not much of anything.
Overall: 3 stars - I've seen it.

One... show I probably don't need to see again.

Avenue Q

I know you've been waiting for it... and had I read my season tickets correctly I would have had this review published LAST Wednesday, but alas, I'm an idiot and looked at my calendar, not realizing my tickets actually said the week before. Alas, all worked out and I still did see the show. Did I mention I'm an idiot? That said...

What a show! Avenue Q is Sesame Street for those entering the real world. In fact, the writers of the show claim to have meant it to be a homage to Jim Henson and Sesame Street, though they specifically disclaim any connection to either. The parallels, however, are abundant and hilarious. The integration of puppets and real-life characters is seamless, though in this case no effort whatsoever is made to hide the puppeteers. In fact, the puppeteers are simply extensions of the puppet characters.

There are certainly some risque scenes, and certainly the majority of which you'd never find broadcast on PBS. But what really takes this show over the top is the music.

It's rather disappointing that by far the most popular song in this musical is the cultural-crossover blockbuster "The Internet Is For Porn," as this sorely discounts some of the more poignant themes and outstanding lyrics in several other songs. Certainly "Everyone's A Little Bit Racist" really encapsulates the current generation's frustration with the epidemic of political correctness of society today.

Additionally, I thought the song "I Wish I Could Go Back To College" is probably one of the most brilliant songs in the show, and solidly demonstrates the writers' connection to basically anyone who went to college in the past 10 years. With references such as "Sitting in the computer lab / 4 A.M. before the final paper is due / Cursing the world that I didn't start sooner / And seeing the rest of the class there, too!" and "I wanna go back to my room and find a message in dry-erase pen on the door!" it's a certainty that any recent undergrads need to see this show, if only to wax nostalgic. Sadly, I can only assume that this show will eventually date itself and become a cultural relic of Generation X.

What's probably most amazing is that the entire cast consists of just 7 actors, 3 of which are purely human characters, and 4 puppeteers who seamlessly perform, voice, and constantly hand-off about a dozen puppet characters. To discount the skill and coordination to required to do this as they do would be impossible.

It's refreshing to see a musical that avoids the cliche of a cast of under-educated youth struggling to survive in a horrible, drug-filled world, and instead focuses on the difficulties and struggles undertaken by college-educated folks entering the real world of today.

As for the ratings:

Script: 4-stars. A brilliant overall concept, though bowed a bit too the cheap laughs at points. Cast: 5-stars, simply brilliant puppeteer/actors.
Music: 5-stars, every song worth listening to. A must-have soundtrack.
Technical: 4-stars, no gimmicks necessary with the rest of the supporting pieces.
Overall: 5-stars. See this everytime it comes to town. In my case, next time it's in town I'll be putting a group together to go see it.

Cabaret

It's been a while since a blog entry, and fittingly we kick things back off with a musical review.

The 5th Avenue Theatre closed their 2007-08 season with what ranks as one of my favorite musicals, Cabaret. It's one of the few musical soundtracks that sees frequent play on my MP3 player. It goes without saying that I was looking forward to this show all season. But it wasn't quite as I expected.

Each time you have a new production of an old musical (the original Cabaret opened on Broadway in 1966), you tend to get a fresh new interpretation. One advantage is that you tend to get the best features of all the previous productions. This show was no exception.

The story surrounds Cliff Bradshaw, an American writer in Berlin during the rise of Nazi Germany, who meets an English cabaret star named Sally Bowles. The scenes take place in the context of the Kit Kat Klub, a seedy nightclub with a flamboyant master of ceremonies. The Emcee serves as the narrator tying the entire show together, and is really the true star of the show. This is the only constant throughout the productions I've seen. Once you reach the edges, things vary wildly.

It was the 1998 revival where I developed my love of the show, so I can't help but compare this rendition to then. The 5th's production has a markedly different feel. Where the 1998 revival envisioned the Kit Kat Klub as a very dark and black locale, this version took a bright and jovial approach, characterized by bright reds and shimmering light. Initially I wasn't as impressed, but as the show went on I began to like it. As has almost become expected at the 5th Avenue, the set design was befitting of the finest theatrical productions you'll ever find.

A huge credit goes to the 5th for focusing on the story. The story itself felt much more prominent than previously where the focus seemed to be more on the cabaret song-and-dance aspect. This saved the show for me.

Even the music leaves room for interpretation since much of it is so tightly integrated to the show itself. Perhaps I am a bit too attached to the 1998 soundtrack, but I was a bit disappointed by the music arrangement. The songs were vastly the same of course, but I felt that many of them were taken at a much slower tempo than was really befitting of the show, bringing the cadence of the entire show down with them. With the first act at nearly 1.5 hours, this could have helped as well. I consider that this may have been a conscious decision, but I wasn't impressed. The show could have been better served by being a bit more lively, and though I'm rarely displeased with the musical output of the 5th's productions, this one left me with a bit of a sour taste in my mouth. The orchestra was a bit sloppy and especially out of sync with the singers at times. Ironically, this probably gave it more of an authentic cabaret feel as I would envision it, but if that was their goal it wasn't overt enough to be convincing and the result was underwhelming.

On to the ratings...

Cast: 3 stars - I wasn't particularly impressed. The lead roles were well played, but musically a bit lacking.
Script: 4 stars - The storyline is simple, yet compelling. Proof that complexity is not necessary for a solid script.
Technical: 4 stars - Kudos to the design crews. I give it another 1/2 star bonus.
Music: 3 stars - It pains me to do it, but I must.
Overall: 4 stars - The vision saved this show. Well worth seeing!

Mame

Time once again for another thrilling theatre review from yours truly.

Wednesday night I went to Mame at the 5th Avenue Theatre. This is another classic from the legendary 1960's musical theatre genre. The plot revolves around a young boy whose father dies and he goes off to live with his eccentric Aunt Mame in New York City. The story takes a bizarre journey with many strange twists and turns, which are all but irrelevant to the musical itself. The plot is just compelling enough to tie the big, lavish production numbers together throughout the show.

And production numbers they were.

Despite the bizarre compounding of scenes, I was oddly entertained by this show.

The lead role of Mame, originally pioneered on Broadway by the equally legendary Angela Lansbury, was outstandingly performed by Dee Hoty, who has had multiple Tony nominations for various Broadway performances throughout her career. In fact, the entire ensemble (of over 30 actors) was probably one of the finest I've seen come out of the 5th Avenue in recent memory. The production numbers were exciting and fun to watch. Though if I had to cite a fault, on a few of them the dancing was not quite as polished and in-sync as you would hope.

The music was typical of the 1960's musicals... I hesitate to say boring, but definitely the composition of a bygone era. A few songs, including the title number, are still equally recognizable today, if not by words by the tune itself.

And I know you love my ratings, so...

Cast: 5 stars - Outstanding. I'd give this bonus stars if I could.
Script: 3 stars - Don't go for the story.
Technical: 4 stars - Another great production by the 5th.
Music: 3 stars - On the high-side of 3, but nothing to write home about.
Overall: 3 stars - I nearly gave this 4, but I want to resist rating inflation, and there's definitely a level between this and the top, so it needs a 3.

Into the Woods

Last night I saw Into the Woods, a musical composed by Stephen Sondheim back in the mid 1980's, at the 5th Avenue Theatre. This was yet another of the "musicals I don't recall ever hearing of or seeing," besides the occasional reference. The musical interweaves four famous fairy tales (Little Red Riding Hood, Rapunzel, Jack and the Beanstalk, and Cinderella) within a common setting and then attempts to answer the question "what happens AFTER 'Happily Ever After'?"

The first act is pretty straight-forward, and tells each of the four stories, threading them together with an original fifth story that builds its plot using elements from each of the other four. At first, I expected it to become quite a mess of subplots that would be nothing if not confusing to follow. However, I was pleasantly surprised to find it very easy to follow, probably the result of the four fairy tales being so familiar and the characters so distinct. But despite how busy it was, I found the first act to be very level-toned, with not much excitement or any climactic points whatsoever. It was a very long (1.5 hours for the Act I alone) set up for the second act. If fact, at the end of the first act, short of a "To Be Continued!" announced by the narrator, you'd likely be asking the question (as some around me did), "Is that the end? Or is it just intermission?"

Act II is where the stories converge and the real embellishment occurs as the characters from each of the stories unite in a common goal of defending themselves against the Giant of the Beanstalk's wife avenging the death of her husband in the first act. I must admit, as the second act began, I had that momentary dread of "should I have left at the intermission?" But the second act proved to actually be a bit captivating, and rather entertaining, which kept my attention easily until the conclusion.

As this was one of the 5th's local productions, the cast drew from the finest musical performers Seattle has to offer, who are certainly not a disappointment. The scenery and other effects were top-notch, while without all the flash and awe that seems to have become the requisite of current Broadway musicals. It was a solid musical in the genre of what I would call "traditional American musicals."

On to the ratings:

Script - 3 stars - Interesting premise, but it just didn't appeal much to me.
Technical - 4 stars - Solid and quality. Even the occasional pyrotechnics. Well designed and well executed. It was like looking into a storybook.
Cast - 4 stars - An outstanding local group of performers, with some definite highlights but consistent quality overall.
Music - 3 stars - Despite its Tony award-winning score (edging out Phantom for the honor in 1988), I just wasn't impressed. Though not bad, I didn't come away humming the tunes or wanting more.
Overall - 3 stars - Hard to justify more. I would see it again if given the right opportunity, but not otherwise.

Spamalot

Joining the list of the best musicals I've seen recently is the 2005 Tony Award winning Best Musical, Monty Python's Spamalot. Based on the legendary comedic film "Monty Python and the Holy Grail," it was 2-hours of non-stop hilarity. Whether or not you are a fan of the original movie (I've seen the movie a handful of times, but have never been overtly obsessed with it like some people), you're bound to be entertained by the show. Cleverly toe-tapping numbers are abundant throughout the irrelevant plot. Anyone who has seen the original movie knows that the plot is only a clever way to get from one bit of randomness to another. Understandably, describing it to someone who has not seen the movie or musical before is an excercise in futility.

Since I know you're all looking forward to my classic rating scale...

Cast: 4 stars - no, really, there were only four stars in the show. Maybe not quite. But regardless, it was an outstanding cast of funny and entertaining characters.
Script: 4 stars - it would have to be.
Technical: 4 stars. Everything you would expect from a Broadway musical, though I reserve my 5-star rating for things that make me go "how'd they do that?" at least once.
Music: 5 stars - my toes were tapping most all the way through, and songs have been stuck in my head ever since. This will likely be making an appearance in my iPod-like-device shortly.
Overall: 4 stars - close to a 5-star musical, but lacking any obsession with the Monty Python genre, I give it a 4. Anyone who is a fan of Monty Python would certainly consider this a 5.

Young Frankenstein

Tonight I went to see Mel Brooks' new world premiere musical Young Frankenstein at the Paramount Theatre. In a rare, yet becoming more common, pre-Broadway premiere here in Seattle before it heads to New York, it proved to be all that you would expect from a Broadway musical.

Based on the classic movie created in 1974, it is typical Mel Brooks vaudevillian, often slapstick comedy filled with innuendo, repeating gags, and one-liners. Now, this doesn't typically fall into my preferred comedic genre, but I still found it quite entertaining. As expected, near constant laughter filled the theatre. A Broadway-caliber cast including Megan Mullally, best known as Karen Walker from the sitcom Will & Grace, was one of the headliners, though really only because she was one of the biggest names in the cast. Her actual role was incidental to the plot, and in fact she only was on stage for perhaps one-quarter of the entire 2.5 hour show. The real showstopping performance for me was Andrea Martin, who may not have much name recognition, but made a big name for herself as crazy Aunt Voula in My Big Fat Greek Wedding. She provided and outstanding and absolutely hilarious performance in her supporting role.

The music, also completely composed by Mel Brooks, was as unique as the dialogue. However not particularly diverse in its style. With many recent musicals trying to set themselves apart from others by using unique styles and themes, this was a refreshing return to more traditional musical numbers. The emphasis is on the words, not the music. Though filled with musical numbers, the music isn't what defines this show.

As for the technical aspects of the show, it was probably one of the finest I have ever seen in Seattle. Its Broadway-bound budget was apparent throughout, from the sets to the costumes, and especially in some not-to-be-missed special effects that several times made me believe I was watching a movie, rather than a musical. I had several "how'd they do that?" moments.

And on to my ratings:

Script - 3 stars - I can't say I'm a big fan of this story. The movie has achieved cult-classic status, which is probably the only reason this story was compelled to become a musical.
Cast - 4 stars - This is the epitome of a Broadway cast. With a bonus 5th star to Andrea Martin.
Technical - 5+ stars - One of, if not absolutely, the finest technical production I have seen.
Music - 4 stars - Filled with songs, but none of which meet my primary criteria of being stuck in my head as I left the theatre.
Overall - 4 stars - I can't say I'd pay to see this again. The show wasn't particularly compelling to me. But it was so well produced I can't say it's not worth seeing once.

Rent

A belated review of last Wednesday's performance of Rent at the Paramount. This is the fourth performance of Rent I have attended, all of which have been on the various touring productions that have come to Seattle over the past 10 years, which seats it firmly at the top of my list of most-viewed musicals. As such, this review is going to be a bit more detailed than most of my other musical reviews, and most of my references will probably only make sense to those who have seen the musical before (or to some extent the movie, which does the musical no justice whatsoever).

As always, Rent draws quite the diverse audience, including many of the non-regular theatre goers. In this case, quite the younger crowd was represented, with many high-school and even younger kids attending a show which would easily get an R-rating from the MPAA (though notably, the movie received a PG-13 rating, no thanks to editing a lot of the dialogue and scenes). Despite this, I think most of the younger crowd dressed more appropriately for the theatre than the "Seattle casual" some of the older folks tend to wear (as I've ranted on in previous blogs). If only their theatre ettiquette matched their attire. But overall, I wasn't bothered too much by the audience around me.

As for the show, overall I'd have to say it was probably the weakest of the productions I've seen. That's not to say it was bad, I just have a lot to compare it to. Of course, there are some constants that don't change, including the script and scenery, all of which has been the same across all productions I've seen. That leaves the differences to the band and the cast, which I will detail now:

Primary cast -
Mark: Good work, I enjoyed his performance... I thought he really captured the demeanor of the character better than some others.

Roger: Came to the tour straight from the London production... and it shows. London audiences probably think nothing of the fact that he has a British accent, in a musical set entirely in the slums of New York City. I wasn't at all impressed with his performance. It was obvious he had worked hard at covering up his accent with a more American one, but frequently it would come through. I also noticed his singing was a bit reserved, which surprised me for such a dramatic and frequently angry role. I wanted more edge, but consider the possibility that in giving more edge, he would be unable to cover up his accent as successfully, thus he toned it down. Whatever the reason, I wasn't as thrilled by his performance.

Collins: Absolutely outstanding performance. This is the role pioneered by Jesse L. Martin (who popular culture knows mostly from his current role as Detective Green on the original Law & Order series). This role is consistently one of the strongest actors in the cast, and this one was probably the finest I've seen.

Angel: By far the most athletic and energetic performance I've seen... which many may say is what the role calls for. Personally, I think it was overdone. It was so overdone it was distracting from the dialogue/music to me.

Benny: Eh, something about him didn't thrill me. His role is designed to elicit a loathing from the audience, and this time he especially succeeded. Maybe he was too good. Either way I wasn't thrilled.

Maureen: A bit of background... the first time I saw Rent, Maureen's big protest scene was probably my least favorite part of the entire show. (In contrast, for most people it's quite the opposite reaction.) Each time I've seen it it has grown on me, and in this performance, it was absolutely hilarious. The actress who played Maureen did an absolutely outstanding job. She seemed so completely ditzy... it fit the role perfectly.

Joanne & Mimi: Both of these were good, and didn't stand out as better or worse than I've seen previously. They just didn't stand out at all.

The band: The music had a bit of a rough start. For most of the first act it felt like the band was pushing the tempo the entire time, and it was just causing a bit of tension between the music and the singers. This came back together towards the second act, but even then, the music just seemed a bit off balance at times, and while the artists were incredibly proficient, I wasn't as impressed as previously.

Overall rating: 4-stars. This is with a musical that would easily receive 5-stars from me on any other day. It definitely won't stop me from seeing it again every time it makes a stop in Seattle.

April Update

Seeing it's the 25th of April and I have yet to make a post since March 31st, we'll call this the April update, and I will endeavor to give a whirlwind tour of the month so far.

I made it back safe and sound from the bonspiel in New Jersey. (Pictures are up in my photo album.) The trip was a lot of fun, but always nice to get home from far away. Being my first trip to the East Coast (besides Florida, which everyone agrees does not count), it was quite a bit of fun. I need to go back to NYC sometime soon.

Curling wrapped up another year of fun and excitement. I curled in three different leagues this year, and my respective teams did reasonably well in all three of them. My Sunday night team was runner-up in the B division, which was a victory considering how bad we did the first half of the season. My Thursday night team won the C division, and my Friday night team won the A division. [A note about the divisions: the general pattern for curling leagues are that at the beginning of the season, teams are randomly assigned into pools and play teams in their own pool. Half way through the season, for a two-division league anyway, the teams in the top half of each pool are put into the A division, and the bottom-half of each pool become the B division. That way in the second half, theoretically you're playing teams that more closely match your skill level. Still, winning the B division is vastly preferred to, say, coming in 5th in the A division. :)]

Now that curling is done, I'm finding myself with quite a bit of spare time on my hands... which is both nice and not. It gets a bit boring sitting at home all the time, so I have to find other things to do. My current goal is to go to the driving range at least once a week and get my golf skills a step-up from deplorable to respectable. :)

I've had such a terrible track record seeing movies I want to see. I think I'm going to get NetFlix for a few months and catch up on my movie watching. For the past, oh, 2 years or so I've consistently had movies that I've seen previews for and been "I want to see that", but never did. And considering I NEVER seem to go rent movies, I think having NetFlix will convince me to actually watch them occasionally and catch up seeing movies I've wanted to. The big challenge will be setting up my queue and trying to remember all the movies I've wanted to see. We'll try it for a month or so and see how it works out.

Last week I went and saw The Light in the Piazza at the Paramount. This will be an abbreviated review, which is probably what the show deserved. I think this show is hit-or-miss as far as the audience goes... and I think it had its fair share of misses. I've determined there are really three distinct audiences for the theatre... first, people who see theatre as an art form, meant to inspire, intrigue, and promote intellectual discussion on a social commentary of the world. Second, people who want to be entertained, whether in comedy, music, lavish scenery, fantasy reality, or any combination of those. And third, people who have such low standards they would give Rachael Ray microwaving a hot pocket a standing ovation.

I definitely fall firmly into the second category, but if the show crosses-over to cover both the first and second categories, I'm just as satisfied. I don't mind the occasional inspiration, but I definitely want to be entertained or awed by a show. I WANT to be humming a tune for a week after the show. The Light in the Piazza missed the mark with a lot of the audiences. While the show loosely may have inspired or intrigued someone, I don't think that's what it was trying to do, and if it was it failed miserably. I sat next to an older lady who came in by herself, and not to stereotype, but appeared definitely to be in the first category of audience I described. About halfway through the first act I looked over and she appeared to be in the most excrutiating agony and/or half asleep. She did not return for the second act. The music was very operatic in nature, which in turn made it difficult to understand a lot of the words during the songs, as well as just wasn't toe-tapping or hummable music. I think it missed the #1 or #2 audience hits, but there are plenty of #3 audience types who were on their feet at the end as usual.

As for my ratings:

Cast - 4 stars. My lackluster satisfaction with the show was, as usual, no discredit to the actors. Outstanding cast, and well performed.
Script - 3 stars. An interesting story, though nothing spectacular.
Music - 2 stars. The music wasn't bad, but did nothing for me. What would have been a good play without music was just muddled up with added music.
Technical - 3 stars. Not much more to say about that.
Overall - 3 stars. Probably more like 2.5 stars, but I'll round up in this case. I've seen it, it was worth seeing once, but I don't need to see it again in the future.

With that review out of the way, I'm caught up to this week. Not too much going on at all. I should get back to work, then figure out what to do with the rest of my day.

Twelve Angry Men

Broadway doesn't always mean musicals. This is the perfect example. Tonight I attended a performance of Twelve Angry Men, the story of a jury dileberating on a death-penalty homicide case. Picture if you will... one scene, no music, no intermission, and an hour and a half of non-stop dialogue. It was quite an interesting show, and oddly capivating despite the fact that I'm much more interested in the musical theatre, which this definitely was not.

The jury foreman was played by George Wendt, who will probably forever be better known as Norm from Cheers. I think everyone in the theatre was collectively ready to yell "Norm!" as soon as he walked in the door of the jury room, but fortunately (or perhaps unfortunately) no one did.

The show had all the drama of a Law and Order episode, complete with emotional outbursts and characters you love to hate. The story alone, however, was pretty predictable once you got your bearings and figured out where it was headed. This would have made for a rather boring show, except for the outstanding acting. All twelve jurors were absolutely amazing, without any weak links whatsoever.

Ratings for this will be short and to the point, yet somewhat counterintuitive.

Cast - 5 stars. These are top-notch actors with a top-notch performance.
Script - 3 stars. A good story, but the strength is really in the character depth.
Overall - 2 stars. It was a good show, but I probably wouldn't go see it again, nor would I have sought it out had I not had season tickets. Ironically enough, the overall rating wasn't saved by the strong marks for cast and script.

Buddy: The Buddy Holly Story

Tonight I attended Buddy: The Buddy Holly Story at the 5th Avenue Theatre. One day after returning from an extended vacation, I nearly decided not to go--what a mistake that would have been!

Buddy is based on the life of Buddy Holly, famed rock and roll pioneer who died tragically in a plane crash on tour with The Big Bopper and Ritchie Valens in 1959. I was expecting a good show, considering the quality and familiarity of many Buddy Holly songs, but was skeptical of this recent example of the aptly dubbed "jukebox musical" which have left me less than satisfied in the past. Complete enjoyment of such musicals rely heavily on one's recognition and familiarity with the associated songs. Fortunately for Buddy, it would be a challenge to listen to any oldies radio station for an hour and not hear at least one tune used in the show.

Understandably, the quality of the performance depends heavily on the quality of the music and musicians. There was absolutely no disappointment. If you came expecting above-average cover band material as I did, you would be completely blown away. Every one of the actor/musicians was absolutely amazing. Combined with the excellent script and production yielded an unexpectedly outstanding overall performance. My only real complaint was that the majority of the second act became just a rock concert. It was as if the writers had a set lineup of songs they wanted to fit in, but ran out of story halfway through, so decided to write one scene and just throw everything else in it. I was momentarily disappointed by this, but was quickly re-energized by the once again amazing musical performance.

As for the ratings:

Music - 5 stars, without any reservations whatsoever.
Technical - 3 stars, good all-purpose sets and lighting, without interfering with the great music.
Cast - 4 stars, at least half the cast were obviously accomplished musicians in addition to being excellent actors. It's always nice to see musicians out of the pit and on the stage.
Script - 3 stars. Good avenue for telling the Buddy Holly story.
Overall - 4 stars. The 4 that's closer to 5, rather than closer to 3.

"Buddy" was a late substitution in the 5th Avenue's season lineup after the Broadway-bound "Cry-Baby" was delayed out to next season, and as such I think has suffered a bit in its promotion. Quite a few different ticket deals have been released in an apparent effort to fill seats after lackluster ticket sales thus far, but it should be a crime to have empty seats for this show. Its three-week run continues through March 4th, and I highly recommend finding some tickets if you have the chance.