Ok, here is example #2 of good production, bad piece.
Half a century. Two continents. The two worst wars the world has ever seen. Four star-crossed lovers. Treachery. Death. Rebellion. Revolutionaries. Horror. Heartbreak. Ex-patriotism. Regret.
This is essentially how Second Stage Theatre sold The Blue Flower...along with name dropping Stephen Schwartz as the producer. Sounds pretty exciting right? I thought so too. So much so that I wanted to see this show since it was in its American Repertory Theatre run. Alas, what Stephen Schwartz deemed to be "the most creative and original piece of musical theater that I have ever encountered in my [his] life" turned out to be one of the least accessible pieces of musical theater that I have ever seen in my life.
The description above should give you a pretty good idea of the subject matter. It's a World War story filled with the many tragedies typical of that time: lost love, lost country, lost freedom, lost opportunity. The Blue Flower centers on historical figures Max Beckmann, Franz Marc, Hannah Hoch, and Marie Curie. If you want to know about them , read a book or check Wikipedia because after seeing the show, I know little more about them than I did before the show despite the barrage of expository information I received during their frequent breaks from character to act as narrators. From what I could tell though, these people led really interesting lives deserving of a musical...just not this one.
As Stephen Schwartz said, this was definitely "creative". A screen behind the actors continuously streamed images, either to aid the narration with artifact-like clippings, provide a backdrop, or service a character within a scene (ex: a lecture board from Max's time as a professor). The actors switched from playing characters to narrating with every change of stage direction. The music was ethereal and gave a sense of unreality. The house shook with the sounds of war, lights flashed, actors crawled; clearly you were supposed to feel the anguish.
But despite the attempt at a visceral stage experience, one crucial element was overlooked in the making of this show: investment in the story. Maybe I'm a mainstream whore, but I would loved this show had it been told in a more traditional format. The screen was distracting and I wasn't sure whether to watch it or the actors. Not to mention it hurt my poor aging eyes. I really wanted to care about the characters, but their dual purpose as historians and dramatists undermined the few immersed emotional moments that were present. The music's devotion to mood setting as opposed to story expansion made the songs boring and indistinguishable from one another. The stage flare didn't excite you because you weren't entirely sure what was going on.
If I could steal the rights and reproduce this show, I would. There was a great story dying to be told, literally. I would move Schwartz from his producing position to his more usual role of composer and thereby create another Grammy-winning, show-stopping soundtrack. While I was at it, I would hire Winnie Holzman to write the book. I would rehire the entire cast of Broadway veterans to realize these characters in a production that actually highlighted their talents instead of theatrical experimentation. And finally, I would pump it full of cash and a chorus and give it some edgy dance numbers. That's as "creative" as it needs to be. A great story told well needs no special tinkering.
Dreaming of Becoming an All-Powerful Theater Tycoon,
Jamin
No comments:
Post a Comment