Chicago News | WTTW: To get straight to the point: The touring production of “Oklahoma!” that arrived Wednesday evening on the stage of Broadway in Chicago’s CIBC Theatre is “a travesty of a mockery of a sham.” And, for the profoundly painful 2 hours and 45 minutes it took for this desecration of a glorious American musical theater classic to play itself out, all I could think about was that its genius creators Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein, Jr. were not only rolling over in their graves, but were pounding their fists on their headstones as they wondered how those who now hold the rights to their brilliant initial collaboration, and its many glorious and groundbreaking elements, allowed this to happen.
4 comments:
I WAS SO EXCITED TO READ THIS ARTICLE I LOVE BAD REVIEWS. I think it’s wild when productions that have a venue and tour get bad reviews because it makes me concerned for how shows receive resources in the professional world. It seems like Weiss’ main take away from this show was it’s shallowness. It reduced many of “Oklahoma!”’s key aspects (beautiful orchestral music, layered and emotional dance/movement) to impressions of their true selves. This is really strongly connected to what we’re studying in the foundations of drama right now. David Ball perfectly captured this feeling when he said that designing for mood is disastrous, specifics create mood. It sounds like the production team for this production had a preconceived notion of what “Oklahoma!” Is supposed to look like. The production team designed and directed based on the likeness of the show they created in their heads rather than the specific mechanics that make the show mean those things.
I have never seen this specific production of Oklahoma!, yet, I can confidently say I love it. From what I have seen from the set design, I think it helps modernize the piece. This music does this too, as it has new orchestrations that makes the piece feel fresh, new, and worth going to despite the fact that you've already seen Oklahoma!. It also makes new bold choices, giving audience members another reason to go see the piece despite thinking you know how it ends. This is how revivals should be done in my opinion. It should not be an exact remake of a previous production, as that does not allow any room for creativity. If you are not working to be creative, provide new interpretations, raise old but also new questions, then why are you pursing this career? I am a strong believer in creating with intention. Whatever I create should have a purpose, and provide something for the world. In my opinion, while perfectly recreating a production does still bring the core themes and messages of the show to an audience, you have so much more opportunity to experience and grow as an artist to take advantage of.
I personally love when classics like Oklahoma! get shaken up. I think it would be boring if everyone just did the same show over and over again. I saw a production of Oklahoma! at the Oregon Shakespeare Festival with my high school in 2018 and they made the musical have same-sex lead couples and had other LGBTQIA+ casting that affirms the identity spectrum in ways that are able to give so much representation to the audience watching the show. Changing classic shows in this way is able to provide representation to people that may have not gotten any otherwise. Changes like this also don’t change the story at all, they just change the subtext and make your audience think more about the message of the show. Now, I haven’t seen the show that this person is referring to but wow their review was harsh. I get it, some people have attachments to the classics and get upset when people think they can be other things. But I think that when people are brave enough to put a twist on the classics, they should be proud of themselves.
I have not seen much of this production beyond small snippets here and there. However, I greatly enjoyed this review. I think it is rather uncommon to see reviews like this, and although there’s an aspect of humor to it, it is still important to consider. Now I haven’t seen this production, but it seems like it is playing into the trend of modernization. This is not to say that productions can’t beautifully retell a story or that things shouldn’t be challenged in theatre. However, it has to be intentional and that intentionally has to carry through to every aspect of the production. Audiences are too keen to not notice when something is being used as motivation to draw audiences in and sell tickets. Truthfully, though I wouldn’t be surprised if more people were drawn to see the production after this review. I saw many people reposting It, making the show relevant again.
Post a Comment