City Center Encores "Merrily We Roll Along"

[uwsman2]

City Center Encores (NYC) is presenting a revival of Sondheim's "Merrily We Role Along" in a completely new version of the show with new orchestrations by Sondheim's "house" orchestrator, Jonathan Tunick, to adjust the scoring so that material the composer revised or newly wrote for more recent productions in smaller settings is adjusted to the size of the Encores orchestra. I saw it this afternoon, and the music is fabulous. The story has some problems, which helps explain why the original Broadway production was a flop, but it has been revised and reworked numerous times. I find the first act still a bit confusing and over-long, but the second act is dynamite, and the new finale that was written for the most recent revival and re-orchestrated by Tunick for this production really works well.

 

And the two male leads - Colin Donnell as Frank and Lin-Manuel Miranda as Charley are superb and beautiful!! I think there is a performance on Sunday and they mentioned additional performances next week. A must-see!

[+ WilliamM]

Thanks for posting about the current two week run of "Merrily We Roll Along" at City Center. The final performance is February 19. I always enjoy your posts on New York theater very much. This is the one time we disagree.

 

I saw the original production thirty years ago. I knew that Merrily was based on a 1930s play by Kaufman and Hart, but did not realize that the story was told backwards. It did not help that the cast was exclusively men and women in their 20s, given that the musical started long after they had achieved their first successes. Many of the songs in the first act did not make any sense because they reflected back on lives and experiences that did not become clear until the second act.

 

Thirty years later I do not believe it's possible to fix the story, no matter how many times rewrites are attempted. So the main reason to see "Merrily We Roll Along" for me would be Sondheim's superb songs.

 

I may pass in favor of Encores' next musical in late March/early April---Rodgers and Hammerstein's "Pipe Dream"---based on a novel by John Steinbeck. "Pipe Dream" was not a success either, but produced several hit songs in the 1950s. More important, Merrrily will be back on Broadway at some point, because it's a Sondheim show. "Pope Dream" has an arguably better score, but will never have another Broadway run because its not one of R&H great masterpieces, not "Oklahoma," "South Pacific," "The Sound of Music," "Carousel," or "The King and I."

[Doe Be Doe]

I saw Merrily Friday night. I knew nothing about it going in but must say that I had a wonderful time. The music was wonderful, the cast great, and the audience on fire. I would recommend it highly.

 

Collin Donnell is wonderful. I saw him in Anything Goes. Not only is he talented, but he is hot! Anyone have his phone number?

[uwsman2]

WilliamM - You can't judge the current production based on the original production. The show has been revived several times over the years. For many of the revivals, Sondheim wrote new material, deleted some material, and James Lapine, his frequently collaborator after the original Merrily who had nothing to do with that show, put his hand to revising the book. This show is different from that show in many specific ways.

 

After seeing the show Saturday afternoon, I listened to the 1994 revival cast recording this morning. What I concluded was that the show works better if you're familiar with Act 2 before you see Act 1. I know this sounds strange. When I was at the theater Saturday, I wasn't crazy about the show at intermission. I thought there were some terrific songs in Act 1 but I didn't think it held together very well. But then I thought Act 2 was terrific. I'm told by people familiar with the original version that the last scene of Act 2 in this revival is completely different from the last scene in the original. And during the "talk-out" after the show, they pointed out that in fact the beginning of Act 1 is different in this production than in the original production, as well. So you can't judge this production based on memories of the original production.

 

That aside, I still think it is difficult to make this concept work, because when you are seeing it for the first time, a fair amount of Act 1 doesn't make sense because you are missing the back story that Act 2 provides. Perhaps the only way to tell this story really persuasively is to do it in chronological order rather than reverse chronological order!

 

But the performance and this cast are so terrific-- and, by the way, they didn't cast it as young as they did with the original. The guy who plays Frank is 28, and the other leads are in that age range, about midway between the ages of the actual characters at the start of Act 1 and at the end of Act 2, so it is reasonably dramatically convincing. They can carry it off with appropriate make-up and dress, which they do brilliantly in this production.

[edjames]

I saw the show last night and agree it appears to be a much improved version than the original (I've only read the original reviews and recent critiques), although the original only ran for 16 performances, and 54 previews, so who had the opportunity to see it? Some beautiful Sondheim numbers and a great cast.

 

Of note is the magnificent completion of the restoration of the historic City Center theater built in 1923. After many, many years of sitting in cramped and uncomfortable seats, the restoration includes a moderinazation of the building and a reconfiguration of the orchestra, mezzanine and balcony seating. Wider aisles and comfortable seats are now available. Special attention has been given to the artistic restoration of the walls, ceilings and neo-moorish design elements using vibrant colors and gilding. The lobby has also been renovated a new marquee has been installed. A truly great theater has been revived and brought back to life.

 

ED

[Doe Be Doe]

The seats are more comfortable but I think the space between rows has been decreased. I felt more cramped.

[edjames]

I guess it's a matter of size and shape. I alwasy thought City center was one of themost uncomfortable theaters to sit in and my knees always seemed to be wedged up to my chine, and not in a good way! LMAO

 

Sources say this about the rennovation: "But progress is unstoppable. The house has been made more comfortable for performers (improved backstage accommodations and a top-notch sprung stage floor) and for spectators (a lighted and heated marquee, improved sight lines, seating with more leg room and more booty room, expanded restroom facilities, and a second elevator).

 

http://www.artsjournal.com/tobias/014_City%20Center%20view%20of%20theater%20with%20audience%20copyrpn.jpg

 

the pics do not do it justice....

 

ED

[+ WilliamM]

 

After seeing the show Saturday afternoon, I listened to the 1994 revival cast recording this morning. What I concluded was that the show works better if you're familiar with Act 2 before you see Act 1. I know this sounds strange. When I was at the theater Saturday, I wasn't crazy about the show at intermission. I thought there were some terrific songs in Act 1 but I didn't think it held together very well. But then I thought Act 2 was terrific. I'm told by people familiar with the original version that the last scene of Act 2 in this revival is completely different from the last scene in the original. And during the "talk-out" after the show, they pointed out that in fact the beginning of Act 1 is different in this production than in the original production, as well. So you can't judge this production based on memories of the original production.

 

That aside, I still think it is difficult to make this concept work, because when you are seeing it for the first time, a fair amount of Act 1 doesn't make sense because you are missing the back story that Act 2 provides. Perhaps the only way to tell this story really persuasively is to do it in chronological order rather than reverse chronological order!

 

If I lived in New York, not Philadelphia, I would love to see "Merrily We Roll Along" again. In my expereince there is a difference in the audiences for Sondheim musicals at Encores or special concert versions ("Anyone Can Whistle" and "Sweeney Todd") and the audeinces for even Sondheim's biggest hits. People who attend Encores and concerts tend to know and love the songs, if not the complete story. And they tend to be Sondheim fans.

 

Just thinking back to Sondheim originnal cast hits that I saw with long runs (600-700+ performances), like "Gypsy" (1959) and "Sunday in The Park with George" (1984), there was a more mixed audience. For "Gypsy," many people came to see Ethel Merman, without knowing much about Styne & Sondheim. By SITPWG, Sondheim was much more established as a master, but the musical also appealed to those interested in art (the scene at the end of Act One was much more fully staged than in the recent revival) as well as Bernadette Peters & Mandy Patinkin.

 

I loved the "Anyone Can Whiste" concert version in 1995, but by then I knew the songs and the story. Most important, the audience was thrilled to be present so there was great anticipation before the concert started (great cast also). I am sure people are just as excited now at City Center.

[uwsman2]

I thought the renovation of City Center was very well done. I found the seat much more comfortable and spacious than the former seats, and there was more legroom as well. And the colors of the restoration are spectacular. It is a much more comfortable place to see a show than previously. Maybe NYC Opera should consider trying to negotiate a return. (I believe they started out there before Lincoln Center was built, and now they are wandering because they can't afford Lincoln Center any more. I'm going out to Brooklyn Academy of Music this weekend to see two of their new productions.)

[body2body]

I loved the score to this show the first time I heard it, and was dismayed to read about all the backstage drama that lead to the original production's demise (only 16 performances after the previews). I had the great good fortune of seeing the 1985 revival at The La Jolla Playhouse (when Dez MacInuff was the artistic director). Sondheim revised the score, LaPine directed. John Rubinstein played Franklin, Chip Zien was Charlie, Heather MacRae was Mary, and Marin Mazzie was Beth. The cast was superb, the show made perfect sense (although it ran backwards through time as did the original and the Kaufmann and Hart play on which it was based). There was talk of taking it to Broadway, but in '85 I think the odor of the previous debacle was probably too much in the air for investors to open their checkbooks. I wish I was in New York to see this show again.

[skynyc]

I suppose it's kind of presumptuous to weigh in with my review after the fact.

I saw this on Friday night, and it closed on Sunday, so I apologize for my belated comments.

 

I have to agree with uwsman2 about this production. I didn't see the original, but bought the LP...which had amazing packaging as soon as it came out. (And then I bought the CD when it came out because it had additional material. And then I bought the CD of the revival which had NEW material...yes, I am a Sondheim queen.) I have seen several productions, but all small, with low budgets, and questionable direction.

 

I love the music, and frankly am sorry that WilliamM didn't see it...if only to hear "Sondheim's superb songs" (WmM's words) being played by a big orchestra. Yes, the book is still problematic. In large part because the characters aren't very likable in the place where they end up (at the beginning of the show). Also we don't really understand how they got that way. Why does Mary's unrequited love for Frank cause her writing career to fail. Why does Charley expect everyone else to live up to his standards and ethics? And in an interesting change from the original, why do we resent Frank for giving up songwriting to become a successful Hollywood producer of fluff? (In the original it's clear the movie was a flop, but now, it appears, it's going to be box office gold.) Are we supposed to hate Frank simply because he cheated on his wives?

 

To address this production: I loved the inclusion of the projections the play during the overture and tell the story in sequence that we're about to see in reverse. And some of the graphics were doozies. The redone Life cover of Martin and Lewis jumping, with Shepard and Kringas' faces photoshopped. Charley with the John and Yoko. Gussie in a Blackglama ad. interspersed with historic pics to set the time.

 

And while I think that the book still kind of stinks, it improves with each incarnation. Perhaps that's because I become more familiar with the characters, but as WilliamM said...it really is all about the amazing score, which contains several of my all time favorite show-tunes.

 

The casting of this production got a lot of comment, but I enjoyed it for the most part. Without question the best Beth and Gussie I have ever seen...and not just because their parts have been significantly strengthened. They both sang the hell out of their respective numbers. Colin O'Donnell was a great Frank, with the good looks and charm to pull of the smarminess of later Frank and the innocence of earlier Frank. Lin Manuel Miranda did a good job with Charlie. His Franklin Shepherd, Inc. wasn't vocally terrific, but was played to geeky perfection. And Celia Keenan Bolger, whose Mary Flynn got the most controversial reviews played it so differently than I have ever seen it, that I finally bought her in the part. Part of this is because as her character youthens in the second, the idealism and naivete that Ms. Keenan Bolger does so well became a part of Mary. (But I think more than anyone other role, I will only ever hear Ann Morrison singing that part.)

 

I am sorry that I didn't see it earlier in the run so that I could arrange to have seen it a second time, because while I do agree with WilliamM that we may see another incarnation of this in New York in the future, I seriously doubt it will have a twenty five piece orchestra ever again.

 

And two other quick notes on the above commentary. I also cannot wait to see Pipe Dream, which I have never seen. Leslie Uggams will probably be terrific in the Helen Traubel role, and the rest of the announced ensemble: Laura Osnes, Will Chase and Tom Wopat, etc. are all very well cast.

 

And the renovations of City Center are indeed beautiful. My seat was very comfortable, I have plenty of leg room and look forward to many more years of theater there.

[+ Lucky]

skynyc, the theater forum is so lucky to have you. You offer a point of view which often amazes me with its insights. We truly get a real drama critic and I thank you for participating. Now- do it more often!

[+ WilliamM]

"Pipe Dream" & Rodgers and Hammerstein

 

Lucky is one hundred percent right about your value here.

 

And I write this after spending ten years of frustration reading the most popular Broadway message board, All That Chat. Here's the Link:http://www.talkinbroadway.com/allthatchat/

 

Since finding "Comedy and Tragedy" here, which I believe we can thank Lucky for starting, I use All That Chat only to check on shows in previews (like "Death of A Salesman")

 

I was too young to have seen Rodgers and Hammerstein's "Pipe Dream." By reputation, it's another musical with a good score, questionable book. I do remember that "Pipe Dream" produced two hit songs: Everybody's Got A Home But Me (Eddie Fisher) and All at Once You Love Her (Perry Como). But those two songs do not come across particularly well on the OBC album.

 

Encores deserves credit for giving "Pope Dream" a chance.

[foxy]

I've often wondered why there isn't a theater in NY completely devoted to doing Sondheim productions with a rep company? His shows are often big hits and have a large following. He has enough material to keep it going. It could be the new Doyly Carte. Someone give him a call.

[+ WilliamM]

How Many Sondheim Musicals Make Money for Investors?

 

I've often wondered why there isn't a theater in NY completely devoted to doing Sondheim productions with a rep company? His shows are often big hits and have a large following.

 

Few Broadway shows make a profit (i.e. pay back investors), especially musicals. The recent revival of "Follies" received much attention on the Internet, and received decent reviews. Yet, it only ran for 162 performances and 38 previews. To be fair, the Kennedy Center produced the revival. It moved to a New York theater for a limited run, so the circumstances were unusually. But I believe (have not done the research) that the majority of Sondheim musicals, both original cast and revivals in New York did not recoup investors' money.

 

I am not sure how non-profits (Lincoln Center, Roundabout) work or the economics of a rep company, so there may be a possibility there. Doyle-type scaled down productions ("Company" and "Sweeney Todd") are another possibility.

 

Since I am not a big Sondheim fan others would have to answer the following question: His musicals usually star major performers like Zero Mostel, Angela Lansbury, Bernadette Peters, Patti LuPone et al. (the Styne/Sondheim musical "Gypsy" included Broadway biggest star of all, Ethel Merman). Would a rep company without big names attract a decent number of audience members, especially tourists?

 

I don't think so, but not sure.