57 posts
|
Post by mrcurry on Mar 21, 2016 21:49:28 GMT
I think great musicals (and movies) have 'wow' moments. Moments that make you think wow. Like a helicopter on stage, an impressive complete change of scenery, a falling chandelier, a child appearing which changes the plot, a very high note. And of course several Great songs.
The great shows have 10 wow moments. If you think through a show it is possible to count these moments.
In your opinion, what are the components of a great musical ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2016 22:47:45 GMT
Yes you can have great songs, amazing effects, a massive budget to play with, but if the book/script/story isnt strong enough, then it cant be a great musical. There are so many shows that have amazing scores, but the book always lets it down. Having a big '11 o'clock number' helps  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2016 22:51:37 GMT
One that changes forever how you feel, lol or think about some aspect of life or the world. Wow.... thats deep! I dont think any musical has that effect on me. I get alot of (useless) knowledge from certain musicals.... but thats about it. |
|
|
|
Post by Nicholas on Mar 21, 2016 23:11:01 GMT
Funnily enough, I’ve been thinking about this a lot recently, prompted by Computer Says Show (well worth watching) and Beyond the Fence. In a three-stars quite entertaining way, I actually did like Beyond the Fence – it had some half decent songs, a solid plot and set of characters, a very decent setting (which deserves a better musical) and hit the right emotional beats (albeit with too accurate a precision) – but for all that, it absolutely was not a great musical. I think that’s because of the computer, and the central flaw is its unwillingness to risk imperfection. The plot’s too streamlined, it hits too many tried and tested right notes, it follows the formula too closely. It doesn’t have that key risk at its heart.
So with that in mind, I’ve come to the conclusion that, whatever a computer might say, I think Human Error is the secret to a great musical. I think that what makes a show isn’t hitting the formulaic marks or having big sexy moments, but having that giant opportunity for massive failure. It has to have risk. It has to have the potentiality for failure. Obviously the best musicals don’t fail in the end, but there has to be that risk of failure in the beginning. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. That’s probably true of plays, too – Hytner said that the four biggest hits in his tenure were History Boys, War Horse, Curious Incident and One Man Two Guv’nors, and all of those weren’t successes on paper – and probably true of all great art of any medium be it Duchamp or Disney or Dostoevsky. That said, I think musicals stray into risky area less often, for tedious financial reasons. In this country we need a) better critical understanding and coverage of musicals (revivals and new, fringe, regions and West End, all need better understanding and coverage), and b) greater performance opportunities for musical writers to risk failure on a less public basis, and through that gain greater success through greater risk.
Also great tunes.
So what makes a great musical? Well, there’s that now-iconic quote by Leonard Cohen: There is a crack in everything; that’s how the light gets in. Thinking about some major musical successes, I think that’s proven true:
The cracks in Les Mis, for example, for all that it has the key ‘success’ points the computer marked, are manifold. It has multiple dying sex workers, Hugo’s novelistic structure and complicated religious and societal politics, and is set during a major historical failure most people only know now due to the musical’s success. In treating Hugo’s novel seriously as Nicholas Nickleby was treated, it doesn’t make concessions to the mainstream, and in risking alienating the mainstream I think that’s why the mainstream like it.
The cracks in the other hit of Hytner’s tenure, London Road, are obvious – a verbatim script and musical style about a provocative, recent, sensitive subject? If it hadn’t worked, it wouldn’t just be a bad musical, but a hugely distasteful one (though I thought the film did have issues in taste the play didn’t, the structure there making it a Midsomer Murders witchhunt for a killer, and it patronised the prostitutes as on stage it never did). On stage it was a huge success which did change how I feel and think about that aspect of community and communal healing.
The cracks in Cabaret are also obvious – just setting it in the time when Nazism became the norm is risky enough. That it ends with our heroine getting an abortion whilst our Jewish heroine has her final moment of happiness before the Third Reich takes hold says it all. Though it’s not too risky a world – George Osborne kept banging on that his budget was a budget that put the next generation first, so as a member of the next generation I think his point was that tomorrow belongs to me.
The cracks in ALW’s best work, for all that he’s now mostly seen as conventional, are actually very daring. The conflicted, heroic Judas of JCS, the complex Wilder plot of Sunset Blvd, the bonkersness of setting TS Eliot’s most childish animal poems to dance... The reason ALW's been so successful is that, actually, he chooses his best material with great discernment; then he mainstream-ises them by ripping off Puccini over the top.
The cracks in Sweeney Todd are something Sondheim’s said about before – taking a relatively flippant and unknown myth very seriously. In treating the morality of mass murder in a very adult way, and with a plot about violence begetting violence that’s absolutely Shakespearean, it could be a pretentious, unfunny muddle – but it’s Sondheim, so of course it isn’t. And then the risks in Assassins make Sweeney Todd look like Mamma Mia.
The cracks in Mrs Henderson Presents are those of Emma Williams and the chorus.
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Mar 22, 2016 3:01:56 GMT
A great musical is simply a great score and book/plot. It is one of the hardest art forms to achieve although many try.
So for example three great musicals are West Side Story (Romeo & Juliet), My Fair Lady (Pygmalian) and Les Miserables.
A great musical production is another thing entirely.
|
|
4,369 posts
|
Post by Michael on Mar 22, 2016 5:23:33 GMT
1, no Sondheim involved.
2, a great score. I can easily sit through a show with no or a paper-thin book and hugely enjoy it as long as the score is good (e.g. Rock of Ages (despite being a jukebox show)), but the book can be as good as it wants, if the score is just average or even worse, I won't enjoy the show.
|
|
656 posts
|
Post by greeny11 on Mar 22, 2016 6:18:21 GMT
I have the exact same view as Michael. For a musical, the most important thing for me is the score. As long as I like the score, I can live with a dodgy plot and still love it (Rock of Ages comes to mind - I love that show). I also agree that I could never enjoy a Sondheim show as I don't like a single score of his.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Mar 22, 2016 7:36:15 GMT
As much as the musical itself is important, sometimes the surrounding events of the first time you saw it are equally so; you always remember it because....and as others have said, the score. If we're not still listening to it today it isn't a great musical.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2016 8:35:37 GMT
To be honest, I don't think it matters whether the show decides to go for a strong score with a shaky book, or a rock-solid plot with no memorable songs, as long as whatever it decides to do, it does well and wholeheartedly. Sure, there's the dream of a strong book crammed with brilliant songs, but many a musical has only really achieved one of these and gone on to greatness.
|
|
1,590 posts
|
Post by anita on Mar 22, 2016 10:52:34 GMT
You must come out humming the songs. A good strong story too.
|
|
5,030 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Mar 22, 2016 11:17:42 GMT
Special effects play no part in it whatsoever. It's all about the writing
Think about the Greek theatre masks, Comedy and Tradgedy , overlapping each other like a Venn diagram
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Mar 22, 2016 13:09:11 GMT
I think it is not about helicopters or chandeliers AT ALL.
The most important thing to me is an interesting story, and good music and a truthful approach of acting through song.
|
|
642 posts
|
Post by Stasia on Mar 22, 2016 13:47:55 GMT
I know shows that don't have chandelliers or helicopters. For example, you take a bar stand, a few chairs and mirrors - and you are getting one of the most beautiful musical theatre stories aka Once.
My personal wows are definitely based on a mix of a beauty of music, poignant texts and characters that speak to me. And I need to have emotional commection with them - then my heart goes boom(c), I laugh, cry and name the show one of my favourites.
|
|
19,855 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Mar 22, 2016 14:16:05 GMT
HEART!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2016 15:02:53 GMT
and any show he can put a "bear" pun into the title of. So (off the top of my head) that's: Miss Atomic Bearmb Bearmitzvah Boy Kinky Bearts Sunset Bearlevard (surprised we haven't had an avatar for that already...) The Go-Beartween Bearly Elliot Show Beart The Beardyguard Bend It Like Bearkham Bearmbay Dreams Bearty and the Beast How To Succeed In Bearsiness Without Really Trying The Bearker's Wife Bearnum The Bearggar's Opera Bearty Blue Eyes Sweeney Todd: The Demon Bearber of Fleet Street (it's surprising how French a lot of these sound...) |
|
33 posts
|
Post by chinatoy on Mar 22, 2016 16:11:36 GMT
I have the exact same view as Michael. For a musical, the most important thing for me is the score. As long as I like the score, I can live with a dodgy plot and still love it (Rock of Ages comes to mind - I love that show). I also agree that I could never enjoy a Sondheim show as I don't like a single score of his. I feel similarly. If the songs are great it wins although the cast needs to be strong as well. I saw one of my faves last year's with two weak leads and it was ruined for me. Loved Wicked with a great cast but the music left me cold, so I wouldn't want to bother again. My all time favourite musical is Les Miz and I've seen it many times. Only once did I come away feeling a bit let down....the understudy Valjean was not up to the job although he tried his best. |
|
2,864 posts
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Mar 22, 2016 16:26:16 GMT
I care about the book a big deal, I can't enjoy a bunch of nice songs if there plot is bad.
|
|
270 posts
|
Post by littlesally on Mar 22, 2016 18:01:18 GMT
Originality and great talent so much of Kander and Ebb.
I do love Sondheim and I'm a sucker for Rogers and Hammerstein.
|
|
57 posts
|
Post by mrcurry on Mar 22, 2016 20:05:11 GMT
People do not want nice or pleasant. There is a bench in a park near were I live. It is a very pleasant spot with a nice view over fields and woods. Yet, there is hardly ever anyone sat on it.
They want excitement, stimulation. Something to talk about their their family or friends, even if it is not perfect, IT IS MORE IMPORTANT TO BE CONVERSATION WORTHY. (Those capital letters were an accident but I cannot be bothered retyping.)
As Barry Manilow once said, 'Make the audience feel something'.
|
|
19,855 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Mar 23, 2016 14:31:56 GMT
and any show he can put a "bear" pun into the title of. So (off the top of my head) that's: Miss Atomic Bearmb Bearmitzvah Boy Kinky Bearts Sunset Bearlevard (surprised we haven't had an avatar for that already...)The Go-Beartween Bearly Elliot Show Beart The Beardyguard Bend It Like Bearkham Bearmbay Dreams Bearty and the Beast How To Succeed In Bearsiness Without Really Trying The Bearker's Wife Bearnum The Bearggar's Opera Bearty Blue Eyes Sweeney Todd: The Demon Bearber of Fleet Street (it's surprising how French a lot of these sound...) Not for the lack of trying!  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2016 14:42:22 GMT
I always find a tap routine peps up a musical.
|
|
4,046 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Mar 26, 2016 21:55:48 GMT
I've been thinking about this discussion & as far as I can think all musicals, whether great or not, include love/romance in some form. Can anyone think of any musical that doesn't?
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Mar 28, 2016 8:48:57 GMT
I've been thinking about this discussion & as far as I can think all musicals, whether great or not, include love/romance in some form. Can anyone think of any musical that doesn't? 'Cats'...does that have any romance in it? I've blocked it out given my averse reaction to it (the once), but I don't remember any kitty luvvin'! |
|
|
|
Post by d'James on Mar 28, 2016 11:59:51 GMT
I've been thinking about this discussion & as far as I can think all musicals, whether great or not, include love/romance in some form. Can anyone think of any musical that doesn't? 'Cats'...does that have any romance in it? I've blocked it out given my averse reaction to it (the once), but I don't remember any kitty luvvin'! That's the only one I can think of at the moment. |
|
736 posts
|
Post by dippy on Mar 28, 2016 12:21:03 GMT
I've been thinking about this discussion & as far as I can think all musicals, whether great or not, include love/romance in some form. Can anyone think of any musical that doesn't? What about Billy Elliot? Or does father son love count? Or even a child's love for ballet because if so then I guess it's about love. I can think of quite a few that don't revolve around a romance though. Ones with children in the main role don't tend to for example maybe Charlie or Matilda (or are we counting the love between her and Miss Honey? Or is there something with Miss Honey's parents that I've blocked out because I hated that whole section? Or do we even say that Matilda's delightful patents count?). I guess it depends on what you count as love/romance but I'd say there are some out there. For me a great musical has to be one with songs where I can understand every single word (yes, I know that sometimes that comes down to performer). If I can't understand what's being sung why be a musical at all? The songs are meant to tell the story too so if I have no idea what they are telling me that doesn't help. The story is also a bit important but most important is understanding. |
|
