Monday, February 07, 2011
‘Les Miserables’ gets a new take after 25 years
Chicago Sun-Times: "Here is the crucial question when it comes to “Les Miserables”: Why even think of tinkering with the classic original production of the musical? After all, the show has endured in its original form for just over a quarter of a century now. And it has amassed an altogether staggering list of statistics, including the following:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
It definitely is worth it. I saw this 25 Anniversary production in Milburn, NJ over winter break, and it was stunning. Theatre should never be afraid to take a fresh attempt at a show, even if it is a classic. In fact, I'd say especially if it is a classic. It's dangerous to get stuck in a rut with a classic piece of theatre, because the theatre can turn (in the terms of Peter Brook) "deadly," lacking the life and charisma that made it classic to begin with. I really appreciate the work that was put into this new production of one of my favourite shows, and it was great to read a bit more about what went into it from behind the scenes.
I love it when classics and well known shows like "Les Miserable" take chances and change things around. No two production should be the same, as theater artist we should always try to strive to make something new and different instead of just copying the original design and blocking. As a designer it is sometimes hard to not follow the same design as the original production but we must challenge ourselves to try something new and make each productions our own. Besides who wants to see the same exact production over and over again. Change is good every now and then. I applaud them for taking a new look at "Les Miserable" and I hope to one day see it.
I'll begin by saying I did not like the framing of this article, with a series of questions attempting to be confrontational and thought provoking, but never actually exploring their answers beyond the fact that yes, indeed, there is a production of Les Mis that is reasonably "new" coming to Chicago. It just didn't land - stirring up the reader, and then just fizzling out.
But to the point: This is when I'll get philosophical and say, Plays are living things. It's not like film where one version is printed and distributed (though home video has allowed directors to change that - eg, the Star Wars you rent now is not the Star Wars that ran in theatres). The point is, during the run of a show, as actors get replaced or make new discoveries, the show evolves. Nothing dramatic in the design changes after previews, until you get to new productions (touring, regional, amateur, high school). But we can't leave reinterpretation to the ones with small runs and small audiences, who change things as much for practicality and boundary pushing. Especially because on that large, professional, commercial scale, the original artists (composers, lyricists, choregraphers, etc) can contribute to the innovation on what they felt was missing. If a play doesn't evolve, we cannot fully explore the text and everything it has to offer. It also can allow new levels of accessibility or authenticity (I think of the gritty 1998 Cabaret revival - the Donmar Warehouse does very thoughtful reimaginings of shows).
But, a part of the audience wants to see the "original" show - the way it originally opened and was intended. Speaking to West Side Story (briefly mentioned in the article) I believe that the copyright includes stipulations that every major production MUST use Jerome Robbins' original choreography. To that same end, the audience at any production of West Side Story expects to see a particular couple of moves. Whenever mounting a new production of a true classic, I think the main thing to consider is what provides entry and access to the meat/heart of the material. And in that, you'll be walking a blurry line between innovation and homage.
I haven't seen this show since it was on tour in D.C. in the early 90's. It was awesome then, and after reading the description's of some of the new additions, I'm dying to see the new production. I'm really interested in seeing the Victor Hugo projections that are described.
I am however, sad that i won't get to see it with it's famous turntable again.
I will admit that I have never seen this show although I have always wanted to. I hear that, even after 25 years, the show is still breathtaking. This new revised version will bring in a bigger audience. People who have not seen the show will see and people who are diehards would not miss it. That means more money for the producers. I don't think this show is going to go away anytime soon.
As a theater enthusiast I have seen about 6 shows on Broadway and about 50 Broadway tour shows. I appreciate it when the tour does its best to create the original Broadway experience and from what I can tell, most of them go to great lengths to do just that. This show has a special place in my heart and when I see the new version I will be very critical of the changes I am sure. Conversely, a show that has been around for 25 years has given everyone ample opportunity for a first viewing and I love the fact that this show is in the new again. It makes me feel relevant.
I also am excited to hear that companies strive to rethink original productions, especially classics. But I was surprised by the direction they were actually taking it. The best performance of Les Mis i've ever seen was an intimate production in a blackbox theatre with a playing space that almost surrounded the audience entirely. There was no turntable either. it was so different than the typical spectacle that Les Mis usually is, with huge casts and numbers. This production had probably a 25 person cast. It was extremely powerful and the intimacy of the space I felt really added to the story. You could really sense the grime and despair on stage. the environment was very enveloping. This company was also trying to do an atypical version of the classic. This big modern, "younger" production is a surprising direction.
"If it ain't broke, dont' fix it".
Ok, but that's not always true. I think that some technological enhancements could be great as long as they're not distracting. Though I don't feel that having the first black Jean Valjean is as groundbreaking as some people may view it, it is definitely worth noting and will make for an interesting change.
Though I hope that the changes won't alter the impact that the show has, I am excited to see them. I don't believe that they are necessary to appeal to a younger crowd. I mean, a good production is a good production. And I don't know that new technological effects will be a huge selling point for most people, but why not? I'm interested to see the changes.
I totally agree with some of the other commenters. Taking chances, trying something new, and mixing it up are all good things. Theatre is a temporary thing. Why do we need to keep one successful imagining around for 25 years? That's just letting the commercial aspects get in the way of the art of theatre.
I would be curious to know more of what differentiates these two productions, and get a chance to see this new one. And: a Les Mis without a turntable? Neat.
Post a Comment