Pippin

[operalover21]

I was bored to tears. Can't enjoy any musical that doesn't have at least one memorable song.

[+ Gar1eth]

I was bored to tears. Can't enjoy any musical that doesn't have at least one memorable song.

 

'Corner of The Sky', 'Simple Joys', 'No Time At All', 'Morning Glow' and 'Ordinary Kind of Woman'

 

And if you'd like, I can sing the chorus of each of these for you- which kind of refutes your assertion. The harmony in 'Morning Glow' often gives me goosebumps. It always makes me want to be part of the ensemble singing.

 

Gman

[bostonman]

I was bored to tears. Can't enjoy any musical that doesn't have at least one memorable song.

 

'Corner of The Sky', 'Simple Joys', 'No Time At All', 'Morning Glow' and 'Ordinary Kind of Woman'

 

...and I would add "Magic To Do," "With You" and "Extraordinary," among others. And for god's sake, the refrain of "No Time At All" is meant to be a sing-along with the audience!

 

I've always felt that the score is incredibly good, and that it's the strongest element of the show. The book...well, not so much. Which is probably why Taymor...er, Paulus decided to bury the story and go for the visual distractions to try to make it seem stageworthy. ;-)

[+ Gar1eth]

I've just read something online. And I don't want to go into it majorly here to preserve the surprise for others. But it seems to confirm one of my previous posts where I talked about the reason they need a new actor for Pippin instead of an established actor in the troup is that they keep killing Pippins. It doesn't say a lot for the intelligence of all the young players playing Pippin, except maybe they think it's not real just part of the production.

 

 

Gman

[operalover21]

'Corner of The Sky', 'Simple Joys', 'No Time At All', 'Morning Glow' and 'Ordinary Kind of Woman'

 

And if you'd like, I can sing the chorus of each of these for you- which kind of refutes your assertion. The harmony in 'Morning Glow' often gives me goosebumps. It always makes me want to be part of the ensemble singing.

 

Gman

 

No, it doesn't actually. You may find them memorable, I don't. I think the Oscar Meyer jingle is more memorable and better written.

[+ WilliamM]

I was bored to tears. Can't enjoy any musical that doesn't have at least one memorable song.

 

I agree. Sad that people are trying to make 'Corner of The Sky' and 'Simple Joy' into memorable songs.

[operalover21]

I agree. Sad that people are trying to make 'Corner of The Sky' and 'Simple Joy' into memorable songs.

 

It's not Gershwin or Porter or Berlin or Loewe or Rodgers or even Lloyd Webber or those French Les Mis guys. It's popularity is totally baffling to me.

[+ WilliamM]

It's not Gershwin or Porter or Berlin or Loewe or Rodgers or even Lloyd Webber or those French Les Mis guys. It's popularity is totally baffling to me.

 

To be fair, "Pippin" was never written to be in competition with the great songwriters you mention, or Lloyd Webber or even the Les Miserables guys. There was much better real rock music being written when "Pippen" opened in the 1970s, so I never understood the popularity of Pippin's second-rate songs.

[bostonman]

I don't really understand all this hate for Stephen Schwartz, who I happen to feel is a very accomplished writer. Whatever...

 

I'm also not sure that Schwartz was trying to write "real rock music," whatever that means anyway. I will offer that I don't really think most of the score of the time like Hair or Bacharach's Promises Promises are "real rock scores" either - or a score like Sondheim's Company - all shows that were in the same era as Pippin - they all owe something to a number of genres, including a then-contemporary 60's/70's pop sound, and also more Broadway pastiche styles like vaudeville (think of Pippin's sections of "War Is A Science" or" What Would We Do Without You" from Company.) I love Hair composer Galt MacDermot's music (I just got to do a production of his Two Gentlemen of Verona, which was a joy to perform), but I find it tends to defy description - sort of rock, sort of pop, but borrowings from lots of other styles as well. (Verona also has a lot of Latin-styled music, which fit the "Barrio" tone of the original production.) And mostly charmingly quirky and often surprisingly moving. But I'm not sure you can call all of it diehard rock.

 

Even today, most of the true theatre writers can turn out stuff that emulates contemporary music (Jason Robert Brown is one of the best at it, and I think Jonathan Larson of Rent fame knew rock from the inside, as does Tom Kitt, who wrote Next To Normal, and Laurence o'Keefe, who wrote the wonderful Bat Boy and IMO the less wonderful Legally Blonde), but again, they are trying to write THEATRE scores, not hit rock songs. If you want a score of rock songs, you have to go to one of the so-called jukebox shows, or shows based on concept albums like American Idiot. Frankly, if you want rock, listen to the damn radio, lol.

 

Of course, even "real" rock musicians have made the charts with songs that aren't really rock in the standard definition. Listen to the Beatles for plenty of examples of that, lol. (The vaudeville pastiche of "When I'm 64," for instance, or the remarkable string octet accompaniment for "Eleanor Rigby," etc.) But do we deny the Beatles their place in rock history? ;-)

 

BTW - news that in tonight's performance of Pippin, "Leading Player" Patina Miller left mid-Act I with vocal trouble of some sort, and the understudy took over. The show must go on...

[N13]

Amazing the polarity of this post. I saw the original three or four times and enjoyed it each time. The choreography was inventive and new at the time. The cast was very much into their parts and overcame the weaknesses inherant in the script. The music is not one of the 'great' scores, but, it is not difficult to listen to or watch. The "War" number was especially strong and I could not see it often enough. The video is ok but not great. But to see "War" again, it is definately worth it...at least to me. Looking forward to seeing the new production.

[+ WilliamM]

Even today, most of the true theatre writers can turn out stuff that emulates contemporary music (Jason Robert Brown is one of the best at it, and I think Jonathan Larson of Rent fame knew rock from the inside, as does Tom Kitt, who wrote Next To Normal, and Laurence o'Keefe, who wrote the wonderful Bat Boy and IMO the less wonderful Legally Blonde), but again, they are trying to write THEATRE scores, not hit rock songs. If you want a score of rock songs, you have to go to one of the so-called jukebox shows, or shows based on concept albums like American Idiot. Frankly, if you want rock, listen to the damn radio, lol.

 

Of course, even "real" rock musicians have made the charts with songs that aren't really rock in the standard definition. Listen to the Beatles for plenty of examples of that, lol. (The vaudeville pastiche of "When I'm 64," for instance, or the remarkable string octet accompaniment for "Eleanor Rigby," etc.) But do we deny the Beatles their place in rock history? ;-)

 

My views come from a personal history that may be different than others. But, it can be inferred by this: I returned from serving in Vietnam in June 1969. I saw very few Broadway shows in the 1970s, as opposed to the period 1959-1965. I have never been a Beatles fan, more Rolling Stones.

 

Of the recent shows you mentioned, I liked "American Idiot" the most, but also "Next to Normal" and parts of "Spring Awakening" and "Rent." To be honest, I liked the latter three shows more for the original casts than the songs. I have seen most of Sondheim's shows either with the original cast or in revivals, even though I am not a big Sondheim fan. At home, I listen to all types of music, including a lot of Broadway original cast albums. As I live experience, I prefer rock music or opera and classical music. I am the first person to admit that my musical tastes are all over the place, but it works for me.

[operalover21]

I don't really understand all this hate for Stephen Schwartz, who I happen to feel is a very accomplished writer. Whatever...

 

I'm also not sure that Schwartz was trying to write "real rock music," whatever that means anyway. I will offer that I don't really think most of the score of the time like Hair or Bacharach's Promises Promises are "real rock scores" either - or a score like Sondheim's Company - all shows that were in the same era as Pippin - they all owe something to a number of genres, including a then-contemporary 60's/70's pop sound, and also more Broadway pastiche styles like vaudeville (think of Pippin's sections of "War Is A Science" or" What Would We Do Without You" from Company.) I love Hair composer Galt MacDermot's music (I just got to do a production of his Two Gentlemen of Verona, which was a joy to perform), but I find it tends to defy description - sort of rock, sort of pop, but borrowings from lots of other styles as well. (Verona also has a lot of Latin-styled music, which fit the "Barrio" tone of the original production.) And mostly charmingly quirky and often surprisingly moving. But I'm not sure you can call all of it diehard rock.

 

Even today, most of the true theatre writers can turn out stuff that emulates contemporary music (Jason Robert Brown is one of the best at it, and I think Jonathan Larson of Rent fame knew rock from the inside, as does Tom Kitt, who wrote Next To Normal, and Laurence o'Keefe, who wrote the wonderful Bat Boy and IMO the less wonderful Legally Blonde), but again, they are trying to write THEATRE scores, not hit rock songs. If you want a score of rock songs, you have to go to one of the so-called jukebox shows, or shows based on concept albums like American Idiot. Frankly, if you want rock, listen to the damn radio, lol.

 

Of course, even "real" rock musicians have made the charts with songs that aren't really rock in the standard definition. Listen to the Beatles for plenty of examples of that, lol. (The vaudeville pastiche of "When I'm 64," for instance, or the remarkable string octet accompaniment for "Eleanor Rigby," etc.) But do we deny the Beatles their place in rock history? ;-)

 

BTW - news that in tonight's performance of Pippin, "Leading Player" Patina Miller left mid-Act I with vocal trouble of some sort, and the understudy took over. The show must go on...

 

Hate? Really? You really consider criticism to be "hate?" I happen to think that Schwartz is a third rate writer ... it's only because the last 40 years of music on Broadway have been so bad that he's even working. If this were the 20s or 30s or 40s or 50s, he couldn't get a job on Broadway. That's not "hate", it's criticism.

[+ WilliamM]

I agree with operalover about Stephen Schwartz. I saw "Wicked" twice, and can not remember one song from the musical. The same is true for "Pippin." I enjoyed "The Light in the Piazza" becauce of the lyrics and music, also "Grey Gardens." And there are several more that would come to mind with more thought.

 

Shows like "Wicked," "The Lion King," "Spamalot" are fine for the experience, but I seldom listen to the cast albums more than once.

[+ sam.fitzpatrick]

I just returned home from my NYC visit.

 

While I loved the show, I absolutely agree that there is not a memorable song from the show. But for me this was a more visual show that captured my attention. (And a couple of the male ensemble members' and their fine bodies....) Not every show on Broadway must have great, memorable music to be entertaining and enjoyable. Although it helps, there are also examples of shows with good scores that have flopped, such as "Mack and Mabel."

[leeper]

This entire post just goes to show you that matters of taste are individual and non-transferable. I agree with some things the professional critics have to say and completely disagree with others. I personally loved Pippin when I first saw it many years ago and plan on seeing the latest incarnation in a couple of weeks. I remember many of the songs from Pippin, but curiously not one from Grey Gardens nor from Light in the Piazza, which I also enjoyed. Different things resonate with different people, and it would be just too boring if we all had the same perspective.

[+ WilliamM]

This entire post just goes to show you that matters of taste are individual and non-transferable. I agree with some things the professional critics have to say and completely disagree with others. I personally loved Pippin when I first saw it many years ago and plan on seeing the latest incarnation in a couple of weeks. I remember many of the songs from Pippin' date=' but curiously not one from Grey Gardens nor from Light in the Piazza, which I also enjoyed. Different things resonate with different people, and it would be just too boring if we all had the same perspective.[/quote']

 

Excellent post. Age also has something to do with opinions about Broadway & most everything else. I had the good luck (because of my parents) to see the original casts of "Gypsy," "Take Me Along" and "The Sound of Music" in one weekend on Broadway in 1960 when I was only sixteen years old. All these years later, I am probably subconsciously comparing those shows (all with major stars and song writers) with everything I see now.

[+ Gar1eth]

Excellent post. Age also has something to do with opinions about Broadway & most everything else. I had the good luck (because of my parents) to see the original casts of "Gypsy," "Take Me Along" and "The Sound of Music" in one weekend on Broadway in 1960 when I was only sixteen years old. All these years later, I am probably subconsciously comparing those shows (all with major stars and song writers) with everything I see now.

 

 

Well here is my view. I love 'Corner of the Sky'. If I could have worn out the VHS tape of Pippin that starred William Katt and which I rented from Blockbuster Video. I loved the show even though I will admit that Mr. Matt was not the best singer- he's still ok.

 

I just saw the Broadway show- I didn't lose myself but I liked it immensely. A fan I talked to who has already seen it like 5 times said that the reason Patina Miller was pulled from the show was for several reasons. There's an illness going around, they just produced the cast album last week and no one got any vocal rest, and the Tony nominations came out and she had to give a lot of interviews.

 

Finally on a more carnal note Orion Griffiths the spectacular Circus Performer- although they are all very good- he is probably the one with the most chiseled physique- although a few are close

 

http://images.bwwstatic.com/columnpic6/2665462F0-9E09-12D9-61DCB91835CFB4B1.jpg

 

Is also a Calvin Klein and Abercrombie model. And on stage in Pippin he wears a kind of leather loin cloth and if he doesn't have an extremely large 'package'- then they've somehow padded that thing.

 

Gman

[foxy]

Once again, look up Orion's videos on YouTube. He should have his own show on Broadway.

[operalover21]

I agree with operalover about Stephen Schwartz. I saw "Wicked" twice, and can not remember one song from the musical. The same is true for "Pippin." I enjoyed "The Light in the Piazza" becauce of the lyrics and music, also "Grey Gardens." And there are several more that would come to mind with more thought.

 

Shows like "Wicked," "The Lion King," "Spamalot" are fine for the experience, but I seldom listen to the cast albums more than once.

 

I went to the opening night of WICKED because a lawyer friend of mine represents Schwartz. I fully expected to hate it enormously (we both did, actually). I didn't. I didn't like it but it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. That being said, I realized later that I couldn't remember all that much about it except the performances and Defying Gravity which is a fairly decent song. What he does do -- and this is why his shows are popular -- is manipulate you. He knows he's not a great writer so he sets out to manipulate you emotionally with emptiness. It works on most people and that's why he's successful. I also wish he had had the balls to make WICKED about what it's really about: being gay, not being green. But I guess that wouldn't have sold.

 

I think LIGHT IN THE PIAZZA was the last really good musical I saw on Broadway (sort of). Almost all of them today are either just clever or spectacles but none of them have great music or lyrics and without that, there just isn't much for me. I'd much rather see a play.

[operalover21]

Well here is my view. I love 'Corner of the Sky'. If I could have worn out the VHS tape of Pippin that starred William Katt and which I rented from Blockbuster Video. I loved the show even though I will admit that Mr. Matt was not the best singer- he's still ok.

 

I just saw the Broadway show- I didn't lose myself but I liked it immensely. A fan I talked to who has already seen it like 5 times said that the reason Patina Miller was pulled from the show was for several reasons. There's an illness going around, they just produced the cast album last week and no one got any vocal rest, and the Tony nominations came out and she had to give a lot of interviews.

 

Finally on a more carnal note Orion Griffiths the spectacular Circus Performer- although they are all very good- he is probably the one with the most chiseled physique- although a few are close

 

http://images.bwwstatic.com/columnpic6/2665462F0-9E09-12D9-61DCB91835CFB4B1.jpg

 

Is also a Calvin Klein and Abercrombie model. And on stage in Pippin he wears a kind of leather loin cloth and if he doesn't have an extremely large 'package'- then they've somehow padded that thing.

 

Gman

 

I hope he has a great body because the hair is really awful and he looks a bit androgynous.

[bostonman]

I also wish he had had the balls to make WICKED about what it's really about: being gay, not being green.

 

A few points:

 

First, Schwartz wrote the musical in collaboration with a bookwriter, Winnie Holzman. If the musical were to be "about" gayness, that would really have to be her department first, as she's writing the dialogue that's driving the story along.

 

Second, where is it IN THE TEXT of not just the musical, but the source material (that's both Gregory Maguire's novel and the entire series of L. Frank Baum's "Oz" books) that would justify this being a story about "being gay, not being green?" (And please, don't being Judy Garland into this, lol.) You have to be careful. It's one thing to say that we can relate personally to a story that has universal issues (i.e. in this case, Elphaba's being different and an outcast) - it's another thing entirely to put an audience member's (or reader's) personal interpretation into the author's mouth.

 

If you feel the story speaks to you as a gay man, that's totally fine. We should all always find our personal relationships with any story. But you can't say the authors failed to tell the story correctly because "they didn't have the balls" to express your own personal interpretation. Chances are, it wasn't even on their radar. It wasn't that they didn't have the courage (Oz reference intended), it's just not the reference they were going for. Again, I ask you, where is it IN THE TEXT of Maguire or Baum that this is a gay-themed story? And if it isn't (and it's not), why should it then be a gay-themed musical?

 

Sondheim has gone on record (most recently in his book Look, I Made A Hat, page 102) to talk about the possible "metaphor" for his musical Into The Woods, written in collaboration with bookwriter James Lapine.Is it about AIDS? Or nuclear war? Or some other world disaster? He makes it clear that he and Lapine were merely writing about fairy tales and the consequences of the characters' actions - NOT anything to relate specifically to the contemporary world. Sondheim writes "The predominant assumption is that the Giant represents AIDS - after all, the show was written and produced in the 1980's...if the Giant represented anything [bostonman's italics - note the point that there may not be any "representation" at all in Sondheim and Lapine's minds] it woudn't be AIDS. The Giant is not a natural phenomenon but a force roused in vengeance...it could just as easily be the atomic bomb, global warming or the economic meltdown...[again, my emphasis] TO JAMES AND ME, IT IS A GIANT. ENOUGH SAID."

 

Now, as far as I know, nowhere has he said that one can't have their own personal take or reaction to the "meaning" of the story. But that's different than deciding what the authors must have meant, or should have meant, or didn't have the balls to write. I propose that Holzman and Schwartz were simply musicalizing what Maguire and Baum had given them, and not trying to "comment" on the story the way you seem to think they should have. Enough said. ;-)

 

If you're looking for a gay-themed musical involving the Wizard Of Oz story, there is a show called Was (based on Geoff Ryman's novel) written by Joe Thalken and Barry Kleinbort, originally directed by Tina Landau (who also wrote the book to the Adam Guettel musical Floyd Collins, and directed that show's original production). I personally have never seen/heard the show, but I seem to think it's gotten good word of mouth, even though it has yet, to my knowledge, to get a major production outside of its 2005 production at Northwestern with Landau directing. Hopefully it will soon.

[operalover21]

He told me backstage, at the premiere, that it was all about "being gay" and that's what he was thinking about when he wrote the songs.

 

You made a lot of assumptions starting with that it "speaks to me as a gay man." It doesn't. It doesn't SPEAK to me ... AT ALL.

[bostonman]

He told me backstage, at the premiere, that it was all about "being gay" and that's what he was thinking about when he wrote the songs.

 

Seems like an odd statement for a straight man to make, lol. I'm not saying a straight man can't write about being gay - just that in this case it seems like an odd choice to make in general. I wonder if you misunderstood him or perhaps he meant it in jest? To my knowledge he's never talked about this take on the material, though he does freely talk about his work. He does, on his website, talk about the fact that he relates to stories about outsiders - but he says nothing about gayness. He actually discusses a great deal of his take on (and process of) writing the material - but nowhere is there really a reference to the songs being about "being gay."

 

Sounds to me like you just have a huge beef with the guy and his work. I'm sorry you feel that way.

[Cooper]

Pippin 2013 revival

 

This production has released video.

 

Another Youtube video on Pippin has recently been released. This one spends more time focusing on the very talented cast, the amazing circus acts, and those outstanding voices. I enjoyed this Tony nominated musical so much when I saw it last month that I'm planning on getting tickets to see it again. I have a feeling I'll be paying a lot more for those front row center mezzanine tickets I had the last time. Btw, at the start of the 2nd Act, Pippin will visit the mezzanine, shake hands, and sit down with the audience.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUAikVmRKR8

[operalover21]

Seems like an odd statement for a straight man to make, lol. I'm not saying a straight man can't write about being gay - just that in this case it seems like an odd choice to make in general. I wonder if you misunderstood him or perhaps he meant it in jest? To my knowledge he's never talked about this take on the material, though he does freely talk about his work. He does, on his website, talk about the fact that he relates to stories about outsiders - but he says nothing about gayness. He actually discusses a great deal of his take on (and process of) writing the material - but nowhere is there really a reference to the songs being about "being gay."

 

Sounds to me like you just have a huge beef with the guy and his work. I'm sorry you feel that way.

 

I have to assume your post is not serious or that you know very little about the theater because there is hardly a word in it that reflects any version of reality.