The making of a musical

Gramps · Veteran Member

The making of a musical

Laura Mom · Senior Member

Gramps, just for interest sake, did you see in one of the above articles you posted that the 1994 revival of "Grease" got horrible reviews from every New York critic but still went on to have over 1500 successful shows? I have been curious all along wondering what the reviewers will say about this "Grease" revival. The funny thing is that as simple of a story that "Grease" is, it does not really require complex acting or pose an opportunity for anthing else too substantially wonderful to earn fantastic reviews, but it is an unending crowd pleaser anyway! Generations of people just love the songs and the show! I'm one of them. Go figure! When reviewers critically evaluate a show do they not look for great character development, depth of story, musical quality etc? Is Grease destined for mediocre reviews at best because of it's pretty simple story line? Anybody else have an opinion on this? I don't feel I know that much about reviews. Also, I have sure seen reviews I agree with and others I diametrically oppose so is a review anything more than one person's personal opinion? I always "review" a show after I see one--chatting at length with people about which character I liked and which ones maybe I didn't like as much and why. We might discuss songs, acting etc. What amazes me, is sometimes someone else who saw the exact same show I just did, comes away with a completely different opinion from mine! I think the truth is, reviews are more or less opinions made from the eyes of the beholder. It will be interesting to watch and hear in a couple months what reviewers think about our "Grease!"

Laura's Mom

Gramps · Veteran Member

I expect the show to be well received. The 1994 show was ok in spite of the bad critical reviews and the very mixed reviews that the 1984 (?) Grease 2 had received. Max and Laura are, in a sense, underdogs by experience and because they are so open and spontaneous people theater attendees are very apt to be on their side from the first notes of the pit band.

I think the most critical requirement is for them to be spontaneous and relaxed so that their natural personalities show through and the fun of the musical itself can flow. It is going to be easier for those in attendance to identify with them than with better known names such as Travolta and Olivia Newton-John. Young folks will naturally, and older folks like myself will be saying to themselves, "Those could be my own kids or Grandkids."

I never had any delusions about my own acting skills in my brief exposure through summer stock but I was absolutely thrilled to be there. I remember the director, an old personal friend, coming up to me after the opening performance of Skin of Our Teeth and saying to me, "Well, you are no Barrymore but you sure had a whale of a good time out there!"

He was absolutely right and Max and Laura will be feeling the same way and with their talent they should excite and please a whole bunch of folks.

Gramps (with grease paint in his memories and stars in his eyes)

Ray · Senior Member

I want to try to make a point about the story by zeroing in on...."You're the One That I Want", the climactic number at the end.........
Travolta, at 28, was long past his teen look and behavior, and made the story seem ridiculous.
When the Top 4 did it, Austin imitated Travolta and was awful. Max played a high-school kid, and suddenly the story made perfect sense. Check it out.
I suspect that the previous Broadway productions were cast "old", and therefore, the simple-minded story was intolerable to the brainy New York critics. I don't blame them.
This revival, by some miracle, is properly cast, and should make a very different impression. We'll see.

grannygreaser · Senior Member

Ray wrote:
Travolta, at 28, was long past his teen look and behavior, and made the story seem ridiculous.

While I don't disagree, John was 24 when he did the film and Olivia was 29 or 30. He was doing "Welcome Back, Kotter" at the same time. I thought he didn't look much like a teenager in either the film or the TV series. And the film approach (and maybe the play as well) was very camp.

Barry Bostwick was the original Danny on Broadway and was 27 at the time. At 6' 4", he most likely looked too old and too tall to be thought of as a teenager, especially given that kids weren't that tall in the 50's. I was 5' 10" when I was in the sixth grade and was probably the tallest kid in the school (definitely the tallest girl). Plus most of the guys didn't reach their growing streak until their late teens. So Barry probably looked out of place.

John played Doody on Broadway, coming in as a replacement during the run. Jeff Conaway, who played Kenickie in the movie, understudied Danny and eventually played the role. Another Danny replacement later down the road was Patrick Swayze.

So, bottom line, this time the Danny and Sandy will be close to 18 and more believeable. And it sounds like Kathleen Marshall is wanting it to be more real, maybe less comic.

Having said that, I know that some of the critics will be gunning for it and for Max and Laura because of the casting process. There were some who really resented (hated) the reality show approach. But as Laura's mom said, it's really only one person's opinion and if people like the show and the word of mouth is good, that's will carry the show. And I think people are going to love it. (Maybe even the critics...)

DogsandBirds · Guru

Expect some negative reviews - partly do to the audition process, party some (one) person's view of Grease. So far, I read that 13.5 million dollars in tickets have been sold. Money talks. As long as a show sells, it continues to survive regardless of what the critics say.

Hopefully, this show will be well received and will have a long run.

Nad · Senior Member

Reviews... I do not care about them... As Laura 's mom wrote the revival of Grease of 1994 had 1500 good shows it says it all... and millions of viewers watched Grease You're the One that I want... Let the critics do their job and we enjoy the show!!!!!

greatwhiteway · Senior Member

I think there is some predjudice towards Grease because of the way the main characters were cast as well as becuase some high brow broadway lovers may feel the play isn't artistic or something. I do think that despite that Max and Laura will get a fair review, or at least something close to it. I think the critics will critique them on their performance. Though it may happen that some will be negative regardless, I think that there are many more that are professional and will write their honest opinion. Even thus far, the few critics that I have seen wrote something good, neutral or not that terrible. I also think they will critique the cast separate from the show. I know they did this with The Pirate Queen. While the show itself was panned the cast was praised.

In any case I have read on the broadway message boards that show is critic proof anyway. Some of the "experts " there feel that Grease has such a widespread, family and tourist appeal that it will not matter what the critics write and that Grease will be a success for 2 years maybe more. Now some of them are not happy about that and hope it folds in a night....but like Max said......It is almost fun to prove them wrong....except for us fans we can say.... It WILL be fun to prove them wrong.

Gramps · Veteran Member

I very much agree with you and do not feel that the critics are a big hurdle but unlike another responder I am very much interested in what they say (as I am sure the cast will be). Even a negative response can be helpful if it is specific enough to help the cast and others to improve the show. And if the show is a big hit well, that would be super.

And also I think it would be especially helpful for Laura and Max, perhaps almost as nice as winning the audition, if their particular work is praised. I do not mean to say that it will be unimportant to the others on the cast but a goodly number of them already have at least some Broadway exposure to help with their careers.

I remember reading about some roles that are on Laura's wish list to perform some day and I would like to see her reviews be so good that they would abet her getting her wish. Same for Max of course and also the rest of the cast, newbies and pros alike.

"Shucks," he said with a grin, "it would be nice for us too."

As the song says, "We Go Together."

Gramps/Stan

Ray · Senior Member

This is a nice, quiet, thoughtful site. It will get busy in a few weeks.
When I use the term "critics", what I really mean, and try to avoid, is "the critic", of the NYTimes, that is.
He gave Fantasia a good review, and she's a fair to middlin' singer and not a skilled actress at all.

I don't know who the previous Sandys were, but if the show did well with Bostwick and Secada (sp?), it will be fine this time around. I don't expect Max to go past his one-year contract, anyway. His performance in "Echoboom" reveals him to be a genius actor, and I expect that Hollywood will gobble him up for the vastly more lucrative field of movies.

reniefran · Senior Member

I like an earlier poster think that a positive review could only help Max and Laura. Even a negative one might make people curious enough to go and see the show. I know that I have discovered with movies that if a critic pans something it makes me want to go see it for myself. In some cases they were right but much more often they were wrong and I loved the movie. About Max only doing Grease for a year, if you mean because he may decide to do something else I think that would be awesome but I think he could probably do it longer if he wanted to. I think he would be good in any movie genre he chose because he has such impeccable timing. I hope he does do some movies because a movie ticket is a whole lot cheaper. But I am determined that I will go see Max and Laura in the show if there is any way at all. smile

dnadanny · Newbie

That negative may be the real, and the real benefit for Max,to avoid...? confused

Gramps · Veteran Member

Laura Mom wrote:

Gramps, just for interest sake, did you see in one of the above articles you posted that the 1994 revival of "Grease" got horrible reviews from every New York critic but still went on to have over 1500 successful shows? I have been curious all along wondering what the reviewers will say about this "Grease" revival....

When reviewers critically evaluate a show do they not look for great character development, depth of story, musical quality etc? Is Grease destined for mediocre reviews at best because of it's pretty simple story line?...I think the truth is, reviews are more or less opinions made from the eyes of the beholder. It will be interesting to watch and hear in a couple months what reviewers think about our "Grease!"

Laura's Mom:
I don't believe I replied to your question(s) when they were first posted. Sorry.

It certainly is true that reviews (formal or informal) are from the "eye of the beholder."

In a city such as NY where there are frequent opportunities for reviewing and a multitude of reviewers I believe it is safe to say that regular reviewers become well known and whether one attends to what they say or not depends largely upon whether we generally agree with them or not, do they appeal or not to us because of their personality or writing style etc..

Reviewers, like judges, sometimes become known for their strict or lenient application of specific criteria and for how strongly they feel about certain types of production or the genre itself.

If a reviewer who is highly respected and known for liking (or being honest) about a particulat genre (such as musicals) were to write a highly favorable or negative review it would probably get more attention than from a reviewer who is less well known or sterotyped.

The trouble is, only a relatively few review readers know much about the reviewer and his/her tendencies unless the reader is a steady follower of such things.

The type of statements I would hate to see in rrviews for this show would be those that say such things as:

"I really like musicals but this one just didn't stack up..." or

"The music was good but the acting (or dancing, or certain
named performers) were bad."

On the other hand were a reviewer who is known for not particularly liking musicals were to say positive things, that would be great.

Like you have pointed out Grease may be an easier show to "sell" than some others, and both Max and Laura are likable young people with a lot of enthusiasm and talent. That helps a whole lot.

Rebbecca Winters Keegan, writing for Time and quoted in Broadway Pulse, notes what she calls a "primer" for making a modern (movie) musical. Her point 5 says, "All good movie musicals give us a lovable character to invest in." I would think that might apply as well to a Broadway Musical and the new Grease is certainly going to have that two-fold with both Max and Laura and some of the other principles too.

It would be sad if one of these two made an understandable booboo (such as bumping into and knocking down another performer or forgetting a lyric or line) as I am sure at least some reviewers would blame it on "inexperience" and make it sound important. This would be hard emotionally on either Max or Laura whereas a person who had been on Broadway might better roll with the punch psychologically and take it less seriously in the overall scale of things.

If I were the father of one of them I would shy away from saying, "I am expecting great things from you," and focus instead on such things as, "I have always enjoyed watching you perform and this is going to be especially fun for you and me both."

Showpeople superstitiously shy away from positive sendoffs, hence the use of "Break a leg," rather than, "Good Luck." Performers in many fields feel the same ways. As a young man when I was playing baseball I used to hear players suggest, "Spit on the field," when another player questioned how a game would go. Same idea.

Personally, I don't worry much about the reviews or the coming performances. I liked what I saw in the auditions, and in the various public venues after the casting selection, and come what may, I would enjoy seeing them on Broadway and even more than once ( no matter who does what).

There is a lot of stress that comes from being professional. My oldest daughter is an MD, a neo-natologist, who specializes in and runs a program focusing on very ill new-borns. She has suffered through both winning and losing some battles but has learned to realize that it goes with the job. Like Laura said when she was taling about the "kissing audition."

"That's what I do."

By the way, Jane. When you go to the opening performance, "Break a leg" yourself.

Gramps

-- Edited by Gramps at 04:25, 2007-06-29

Ray · Senior Member

reniefran wrote:

..... I hope he does do some movies because a movie ticket is a whole lot cheaper. But I am determined that I will go see Max and Laura in the show if there is any way at all.

The movies, or a tv series, are the only ways that the vast public will get to see Max.
As marvelous as he is in Echoboom, I doubt that his image on a screen will ever match the excitement of seeing him live in action.
When determination grows to the level of inevitability, the Law of Attraction (note "law") dictates that it will happen.

reniefran · Senior Member

I don't know about the law of attraction but let's just say that I am stubborn enough that when I really want to do something I will do it. Of course I pray about things first to make sure it's what He wants too! I do think stubborness can be a virtue and of course that virtue is persistance. So look out Broadway here I come! smile

Hello799 · Senior Member

Jane and Rachel, please check your private messages. THANK YOU

DogsandBirds · Guru

Anyone who thinks that live theater is the same as going to a movie, hasn't attended the theater very much if at all.

There is NOTHING like live theater. There are no "takes." You do it and the audience sees what you do at the minute not a retake when a line is flubbed or a misstep happens. Each performance is a new beginning. The actors relate and react to the energy of the audiences which vary from time to time.

The joy of seeing actors being in the moment is a thrill beyond anything a movie may offer.

grannygreaser · Senior Member

Very true, DogsandBirds, and it makes it fun to see it more than once 'cause the performances are a little different each time. Can't wait to hear people's reactions to the show! (And to see it myself in September!)

greatwhiteway · Senior Member

That's one of the reasons I bought tickets to the first preview. I figured other than opening night it would be the time when there was the most energy, enthusiasm etc. from both the audience and the cast. I guess i want to feel the thrill as much as possible. Old as I am I will probably be at the stage door that night, but i'll blame it on my kids who will be there if anyone looks askance.

dlz7 · Member

i agree that live theatre is completely different from a movie. I have seen the original production of grease twice and the 1992 production twice. However I've only seen the movie once, because the movie tells the story exactly the some way each time you watch it there is no spark and spontaneity. I will be going to see max and laura in oct with my daughter and two granddaughters. I am sure it will be well received and again different than the other productions. we look forward to seeing max with all his charm and warmth.

DogsandBirds · Guru

While the versions of Grease are very different, movie and theater, I was referring to the experience of going to any movie as compared to seeing live theater.

The interaction of a cast on any given night is magical, since there is an immediacy to a live performance and the performance of the actors is in the here and now, no retakes or do overs.

I can't wait to see this current production of Grease!

Ray · Senior Member

reniefran wrote:

.... So look out Broadway here I come!

Now, you're talkin' !!!

reniefran · Senior Member

Yep. I don't know how or when but I'm so there! I've only really been to one stage play in my adult life and it was Wait Until Dark. I don't know if you're familiar with it or not but it is a real thriller. There was a movie made of it back in the 50's I think. The basic premise is that a blind woman buys a doll that contains drugs, sewn into the lining of the doll, of which she is unaware. She finds out and prepares to meet the man who is on his way to collect the doll and kill her. She figures out a way to trip the breaker when he starts after her and she hides a knife in the dryer. There is a point at which she does trip the breaker and you hear a scuffle but you can't see anything because they not only kill the stage lights but all of the house lights. He manages to find the refrigerator and when the lights come back up he is sprawled accross the door with the knife in his back. Whoa! Talk about adrenaline pumping! It was amazing. So I think I'm overdue for another live stage performance and I think a musical is just the ticket! smile

Ray · Senior Member

Yes, overdue for another stage performance....one, in particular.
I saw the movie, Wait Until Dark, seems like a hundred years ago. I vaguely remember a blind woman, and that's all.
Your detailed description shows how open you are to enter the world of make-believe and remember the experience forever. I think that's the power of live theater, where the audience and performers can vibrate as one. I expect to do a lot of vibrating when I see Grease.

Gramps · Veteran Member

If you are interested in how a choreographer creates check out Twyla Tharp's small book, The Creative Habit. She is a contemporary choreographer and has worked on films such as Hair, Ragtime and Amadeus: Television: Baryshnikov by Tharp (which won two Emmys). On Broadway Stage she has created Singing In the Rain and won a Tony for Movin' Out.

She really gets down to personal nitty gritty and the details of coming up with ideas and implementing them into a production.

This is the kind of a book where the reader can skip around and sample different pages as well. It is in a lot of libraries.

It is interesting too in that she talks about the necessary and useful attributes of a star dancer and a number of them are things contributors to this forum about Laura and Max. One of them was teachability and several have noted that here.

Gramps

Gramps

-- Edited by Gramps at 18:05, 2007-07-09

-- Edited by Gramps at 18:14, 2007-07-09

-- Edited by Gramps at 22:21, 2007-07-09

DogsandBirds · Guru

She also choreographed Movin' Out, a dance musical set to the music of Billy Joel that enjoyed success and The Times they are a Changin', set to the music of Bob Dylan which closed after very few performances.

-- Edited by DogsandBirds at 00:26, 2007-07-10

Gramps · Veteran Member

Thanks. I meant to include that and just forgot it.

Stan/gramps