Monday, April 27, 2009
What's the difference between Best Musical and Best Revival of a Musical?
PRODUCER’S PERSPECTIVE: "This question came in over the weekend, after a reader noticed my tweet about going to see the new Broadway revival of West Side Story."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I dont really agree with this producer fellow. I dont think that we should view revivals as an 'improvement' on the original production. There is of course the aspect of 'I remember that the first time - I like it this way much better' - but I feel that the purpose should be to create new theatre. "Sunday in the Park with George" is a prime example - Sam Buntrock used animation to further the point that George's world is ever changing - and as dynamic as the blobs of paint that he placed on the canvas. I dont feel that it was 'improving' on the cut-outs that moved in and out - but rather created a new view of the production - as a spectacle.
Revivals are tricky to do. You want to remain true to the script and concept of the playwright while taking a new spin on things. I agree with Josh that revivals are not improvements they are simply different ways of looking at the same piece in a new time and with a different lens. While revivals that simply repeat the original production are almost always a flop, borrowing pieces here and there and changing them to fit YOUR concept is ok (and even sometimes required to meet the audiences expectations).
While I agree with Josh in the fact that “new” does not necessarily mean “better” I have another issue. Why should a “revival” not be based on the same categories as any other show. While I understand the authors analogy using MVP and MIP, however, shouldn’t each production be evaluated the same regardless of the shows production history? I believe that just because something has been produced on Broadway before, does not mean that by itself, it is not a complete work, able to be evaluated and reviewed in the same category as any other musical.
Post a Comment