feedetincelle
|
A Poll and a Question on Broadway MusicalsHello everyone!
I'm trying to do research on whether a theatre production would be more successful (in terms of people wanting to go and see it) if there is a good/interesting/groundbreaking plot rather than a dazzling performance (the stage design, art direction, songs, choreography)?
I know the all of the above are very much interlinked to one another but I'd just like to point out that this question is more a....if you have to choose one or the other, which one would you prefer? Plot or Perfomance?....and why?
Thank you in advance for all your help in answering the question 
x
|
Salome
|
seriously a great show needs a combo of both.
|
dwarves r very upsetting
|
^I agree with Salome. Although if you look at any of the resent reviews of Pirate Queen. Most review think that the music, dancing and plot are unoriginal. Although they all like Stephanie J. Block. Only time will tell if that show is actually successful.
|
music is my life!!!
|
i agree, too, but if i had to choose i'd choose i great performance cuz you could get a fascinating plot from a book but you can't get a performance from books.
|
ILoveToSing2010
|
they have to have both to be a great show
|
Pounce
|
I think the preponderance of evidence supports the importance of the performance in making a show successful. For instance, take away the Lithgow and Co. cast from DRS and it closes. Sutton Foster is what made TMM. The most successful shows are the spectacles. PotO has the longest run on Broadway followed by CATS. Both have pretty weak plots. Even Les Miz has a strong element of spectacle with its barricade, and dramatic back and forth march and flag waving during "One Day More". I think the elements of spectacle and "Bring Him Home" made Les Miz the success it is rather than the story. Still I think a show's topic is important to hook the public's interest but the promise of an entertaining performance gets them to put their money down.
As for plot, plot...smot...doesn't really count for much when trying to attract an audience. We'd like to believe that but I think the evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
|
everdancing
|
I would say the performance. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE when musicals have a good plot, but if I saw a show that had the BEST plot in the entire world, but the actors sucked, there was bad or no dancing, costumes, or sets I doubt very much I would like that production of the show. Where as there are plenty of very successful shows that have really stupid plots when you think about it, but everyone forgives them for that because of the Razzle Dazzle.
|
Eponine93
|
For success= the performance.
For my own personal preference= the plot. Only because the plot, music and lyrics are universal and transport to ALL performances- school, community, tours...
|
feedetincelle
|
Wow it's actually nearly a tie, if it weren't for my vote just now for performance.
I just saw Lion King with a friend of mine and after seeing it I thought the animated version captured my heart more but my friend actually liked the musical version of Lion King.
I have to admit though, what makes me go see a musical is the singing, the dancing and to quench my curiosity of how they're going to tackle the stage design and art direction in conveying a story live on theatre.
Are there any musical in particular that you think has an interesting plot and poor performance, music, etc or vice versa?
It would be interesting to see a list of those and what other ppl think of them.
|
feedetincelle
|
| everdancing wrote: | | I would say the performance. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE when musicals have a good plot, but if I saw a show that had the BEST plot in the entire world, but the actors sucked, there was bad or no dancing, costumes, or sets I doubt very much I would like that production of the show. Where as there are plenty of very successful shows that have really stupid plots when you think about it, but everyone forgives them for that because of the Razzle Dazzle. |
I quote from a book, on Cats the musical:
"The music is constrained, pinched- but it's brilliantly danced."
and I have to agree with Mr. Mackintosh when he said that people who saw the show for the first time can't quite pin down what it is but had a wonderful time experiencing it.
|
Angel-of-Music*
|
the storyline is meaningless if all you can think about is how crap performance is and vice versa
|
EponinesRain
|
This is difficult but I'd prefer a solid plot over any spectacle feat. Your definition of plot is that of a show's ideas and messages, which I think are able to cross multiple social context and therefore be more meaningful and memorable.
Thing is, the performance is supposed to service the plot, so a show without a great plot already loses its basic foundation for greatness. Sure, some big numbers may seem spontaneous and great in themselves, but each song still (supposedly) forwards the narrative/diegesis. In other words, these songs are little plots within themselves contributing to the overarching main narrative thread. So, a plot and its ideas are the blocks from which the stage design, art, choreography build upon. Take that basic frame away and you just have spurts of greatness with the bright lights; but the show as a whole is, I think, cemented and strung together by a great plot.
Of course, as Salome said, an ideal performance is strong on both fronts. That's the art of musicals, anyway? They're not just a plot, which one can get from a book, but they're not only spectacle, either, which one gets from exhibitionist shows (like magic shows, stunt shows, concerts). It must have a fusion of these. Bleh- now I'm confused...haha...
Hrm, I know there's a passage in Musical World... where Boublil and Schonberg specifically address this...
|
ThespianForLife
|
Both have to be good. However, the music and show have to be attractive to attract people in the first place.
TFL 
|
Theatregeeke
|
Even though both have to be there, but a good performance is really what people come to see.
For example, I'm doing the show High Society right now, which has wonderful music and really great choreography, but I personally find the plot a little dull. Regardless of this, I've really enjoyed working on it, and I think audiences will enjoy it too. Despite it's trivial plot.
|
feedetincelle
|
| EponinesRain wrote: |
Thing is, the performance is supposed to service the plot, so a show without a great plot already loses its basic foundation for greatness. Sure, some big numbers may seem spontaneous and great in themselves, but each song still (supposedly) forwards the narrative/diegesis. In other words, these songs are little plots within themselves contributing to the overarching main narrative thread. So, a plot and its ideas are the blocks from which the stage design, art, choreography build upon. Take that basic frame away and you just have spurts of greatness with the bright lights; but the show as a whole is, I think, cemented and strung together by a great plot.
|
This debate is exactly what I'm trying to find out here. You've put it into words just perfectly thank you!
Although I agree one can find many other more engaging plots within a book and let one's imagination roam free with ideas and imagery, a musical is different in a way that it provides you with music and a great spectacle in general.
I tried finding "Musical Worlds" online....but I can't seem to find anything on that. Could you tell me where I can get this?
|
pish123c
|
Both.
If you give me a show with nothing but spectacle, yeah it was visually amazing, but it lacks substance. Like diet theatre that leaves a weird aftertaste.
And if you just give me straight out story with no spectacle whatsoever, I get bored.
For a good show, both have to be great.
|
EponinesRain
|
| feedetincelle wrote: | | I tried finding "Musical Worlds" online....but I can't seem to find anything on that. Could you tell me where I can get this? |
Really? It's pretty accessible to me! They have it at Amazon.com, ebay.com, Borders.com, and BarnesandNoble.com. Maybe you're not searching under the correct title. Try The Musical World of Boublil and Schonberg by Margaret Vermette 
By the way, Vermette's book is a good read, but I think you'd find some articles about the classic Hollywood film genre and about stage musicals more helpful. I'd suggest that you take a look at Jane Feuer's The Self-Reflective Musical & the Myth of Entertainment and Kathryn Kalinak's The Language of Music, if you can get your hands of them. I think both of these articles will provide you with stronger ideas for what you're "trying to find out here." If you'd like, I can PM these articles to you or anybody else who wants to read 'em.
|
feedetincelle
|
Thank you for the help with the documents Eponinesrain.
They're very helpful indeed!
|
Bookworm
|
This is a bit late, but I'd just like to say you need a mix of both to get a great show, but without good dancing/acting, the show is just empty.
|
Salome
|
dancei s not essential to all shows. many of the best musicals feature little or no dance.
|
EponinesRain
|
| feedetincelle wrote: | | Thank you for the help with the documents Eponinesrain. They're very helpful indeed! |
Glad I could help!
| Salome wrote: | | dancei s not essential to all shows. many of the best musicals feature little or no dance. |
Agreed.
I think we’ve all come to the conclusion that both plot and performance are necessary to make a good show. As to what people prefer....eh, it's all subjective. I guess I like plot b/c it's what brings individual performances and numbers together. Or else, why not just watch vaudeville acts? Vaudeville performances have great spectacle; but the musical trumps these by having a motivated, coherent plot to bring all these separate acts together. Usually, that plot posits ideas that you can integrate/apply to your own life, unlike the live performances and sets. But wouldn't it be neat if we could all bring back our own chandeliers and barricade structures? Hehe
Herbert Kretzmer, one of the lyricists for Les Miserables, says something interesting regarding the plot v. lyrics. He says:
“Many of the songs in Les Miserables take the form of a soliloquy, where characters directly express what is going on in their heads. This is one of the things that is wonderful about musical theatre. You can move with dazzling speed through a narrative process, which, in a straight play, might take half an hour of exposition and action to cover.
"I was careful not to be too clever when I was working on Les Miserables because it’s a very strong story requiring very plain words. The story is the most important thing; what will always undermine and subvert the story are lyrics that are too smart, too-attention-seeking. The moment one thinks ‘what a clever rhyme’ you have distracted the audience, you have let the story down.
"With little Cosette in ‘Castle on A Cloud’…it was decided to frustrate expectation; so instead of the predictable rhyme we had, ‘There is a room that’s full of toys/There are a hundred boys and girls'” to fit the mental maturity of a badly treated little girl, with no schooling or education.
To be nit-picky and trivial, do you guys think that the rhyming helps or actually disrupts the narrative, as Kretzmer mentions here? I dunno- I actually snap back to reality when my expectation of that rhyme is frustrated.
|
Dvarg
|
| EponinesRain wrote: | The moment one thinks ‘what a clever rhyme’ you have distracted the audience, you have let the story down.
"With little Cosette in ‘Castle on A Cloud’…it was decided to frustrate expectation; so instead of the predictable rhyme we had, ‘There is a room that’s full of toys/There are a hundred boys and girls'” to fit the mental maturity of a badly treated little girl, with no schooling or education. |
Isn't this a little contradictive? Not rhyming "toys" with "boys" isn't clever, but it does disract the audience because we think "why didn't that rhyme?" Isn't that letting the story down as much as overusing clever rhyme?
As for the actual topic here, I agree with everyone, since obviusly both are important.
Except that I think the plot and actually everything that is written is most important to me. I am a very text oriented person. Reading a musical often gives me as much joy as attending one. But I'm not sure that was included in you question.
Naturally, I enjoy a good performance. But as I see it, any performance is just one of several performances, while the text is the actual musical. I have a very Platonesque view on musicals.
|
