These Queens Have "Something Extra"

Review: Pageant

The glamorous ladies of the Miss Glamoresse pageant are sure to entertain.

Between the runaway success of Broadway's Kinky Boots and the continually growing popularity of RuPaul's Drag Race (which is incidentally the best reality show on television, and something you should binge watch *immediately* if you aren't familiar with it), drag is definitely having a cultural moment. Which is why it makes perfect sense to bring back the 1991 Off-Broadway musical Pageant, a hysterical sendup of beauty pageant culture featuring (what else?) men in drag. This 90 minute gem is one of the most giddily entertaining shows in town, and is must-see viewing for anyone with even the mildest interest in musical theatre and/or drag.

The setup of Pageant is simplicity itself: six contestants, having already won their regional beauty pageants, convene onstage to vie for the title of Miss Glamoresse and the accompanying spokeswoman job. They compete in staple categories like the Eveningwear, Swimsuit, and Talent portions, along with Glamoresse-specific areas like Spokeswoman and the aptly named Beauty Crisis Counseling. Adding an element of unpredictability to the show, five audience members are chosen at random to act as judges, meaning the final outcome changes each night.

The entire affair is a lovingly tongue in cheek mockery of high stakes pageants like Miss America, howling funny in its satire without ever coming across as judgemental or mean spirited. I haven't laughed this much at a show in years, and at one point I was literally crying from laughing so hard. For all the absurdity on display - and there is plenty of it - the contestants play things remarkably straight. Outside of a few throwaway lines there is little acknowledgement that these ladies are actually men, which prevents the show from becoming self-aware commentary and ensures the laughs come from character and situation rather than overly clever metatheatrics. The zinger-filled book by Frank Kelly and Bill Russell keeps everything moving at a breezy pace, and while Albert Evans' score isn't particularly memorable it gets the job done and is an excellent framework for Kelly and Russell's cheeky lyrics.

All of the Miss Glamoresse contestants do a fabulous job crafting fully formed personas based on wonderfully evocative regional titles like Miss Great Plains or Miss Bible Belt, and every audience member will surely have a favorite. Alex Ringer's Miss Texas is especially beguiling, an old-school pageant queen channeling the poise, beauty, and barely disguised disdain often attributed to old southern money; to use drag parlance, she is "serving Dallas realness." Ringer's talent portion is the real deal, a delightfully kitschy and athletic tap routine complete with six shooters and a toy pony. And should it become clear that Miss Texas won't be winning the night's competition (as happened at the performance I saw), Ringer's underplayed, slow burn reaction is pure comedic genius.

As the aforementioned Miss Bible Belt, Curtis Wiley brings the house down with his gospel-influenced number "I'm Banking on Jesus." Wiley perfectly modulates his God-loving, "praise him" shtick, heightening it enough to elicit deep belly-laughs without crossing the line into abject mockery. Seth Tucker plays Miss West Coast as a blonde bombshell with minimal understanding of what's happening, and her Spokeswoman segment (too good to spoil here) is one of the night's biggest laughs. Swing Fred Odgaard was on in the role of Miss Great Plains the evening I attended, with a "you betcha" persona clearly inspired by the great Midwest-set pageant film Drop Dead Gorgeous. (Pageant actually shares a lot of comedic sensibilities with that cult classic film.) Odgaard wasn't quite as comfortable in his role as the rest of the performers - understandable given his minimal rehearsal time - but his interpretive poetry "talent" still had me in stitches.

Nic Cory is underutilized as Miss Industrial North East, although he milks what he has for all its worth. Marty Thomas' Miss Deep South suffers from too much overlap with the other contestants (Miss Texas and Miss Bible Belt cover similar territory in a more defined, specific way), although Thomas scores big points for his patently ridiculous ventriloquist act. And as the ringmaster of the entire spectacle, John Bolton is suitably charming even if his stage time steadily decreases as the evening goes on.

You would be hard pressed to find a more entertaining 90 minutes than Pageant, and the show has thankfully been extended into the New Year, giving you plenty of chances to see these beauties for yourself. There's a wholesome sweetness to this pageant that belies a simpler time, yet the show feels as fresh and hilarious as if it were written yesterday. Come prepared to laugh, heartily and often, at one of the best theatrical productions of the year. As Bolton's host character sings towards the beginning of the show, these queens definitely have "something extra."

Broadway and the Burden of Unrealistic Expectations

Tony-nominee Andrew Rannells dons Hedwig's wig and high heels through October 12th, at which point Michael C. Hall takes over.

For the third week in a row, Playbill.com has felt the need to take thinly disguised digs at Andrew Rannells' box office performance in Hedwig and the Angry Inch. And while nothing they have reported has been untrue, the way they are spinning the story is indicative of a problem in the way they and many others view Broadway grosses, and the unrealistic expectations placed on most shows.

In case you somehow hadn't heard, Tony-winner Neil Patrick Harris brought in ridiculous amounts of cash during his 5 month stint as the German transgendered rocker. The show was routinely sold-out, set various house records at the Belasco Theatre, and spent most of the summer grossing more than $1 million per week. Obviously, the producers of the revival were wise to wait until Harris' schedule allowed him to do the show before mounting a Broadway production, which recouped its entire investment in mid-July. It was a given that the show would see a decrease in box office receipts when Harris departed (it was mildly surprising the producers decided to keep the show running without him), but I think spinning Rannells' run thus far as a financial disappointment is a disservice to Rannells, the show, and Broadway in general.

Last week, Hedwig made $514,411 (59% of its potential gross) and played to 70% capacity crowds. That is a large step down from last week's 81% potential gross and 93% full houses and an even bigger drop from Harris' heyday, but every single show on Broadway saw significant (often six figure) drops in grosses following the Labor Day holiday. The one exception to this is the Nathan Lane-Matthew Broderick led It's Only a Play, which managed to buck the trend by having 8 performances instead of the 5 it had the week before. Hedwig is still doing better, gross-wise, than the much more expensive Cinderella, Best Musical winner Once, and the Diane Paulus-helmed Pippin.

Considering that Hedwig is a cult musical which until a few months ago no one was sure could succeed on the Great White Way and has lost its main selling point, I'd call those numbers just fine. As a small show with low running costs which has already recouped (there aren't many costumes or pricey technical elements, and you can bet that Rannells' salary isn't anywhere near what Harris was being paid), Hedwig likely has a very low bar to clear in order to remain profitable. And while Rannells is popular within theatre circles, he doesn't have nearly the mainstream appeal or drawing power as Harris. Viewed in that light, the fact that he and the Hedwig brand can fill the Belasco to 70% capacity during a notoriously slow time of year is something to be celebrated.

The fact that many people view these numbers as disappointing points to a larger problem in the unrealistic expectations producers and the public have for Broadway shows. Because shows like Wicked and The Lion King have done so well for so many years, they have erroneously become the yard sticks by which a potential hit is judged. This is akin to saying that an athlete is no good because they aren't performing at Olympic medal levels, which is absolutely ridiculous. The last place finisher at the Olympics is still better than a huge percentage of the population, and the fact that Hedwig continues to run (and has just announced an extension into January 2015) while other spring shows have already closed is a testament to how well the show is doing financially. Just because a show isn't making $1 million a week doesn't mean it's doing poorly, and we shouldn't consider shows a disappointment if they don't run for 10+ years.

But unfortunately, many people do use those metrics as the measure of a show's success, which is unfair to the industry and all the very talented people working in it. It casts the industry in a poor light and makes the theatre seem much less healthy than it actually is; as I have stated before, I think the current model of more shows with shorter runs is ultimately better and more exciting for the industry artistically. And while I am not privy to any budgeting meetings for Broadway shows, I think too many shows are budgeted in a way that they have to do sell-out business to be financially viable, since that is what is expected of a "successful" show.

So let's try to focus on the positive. If a relative unknown like Andrew Rannells can retain such a large percentage of certified star Neil Patrick Harris' box office numbers, that is a win. It shows that audiences are in fact interested in the show and not just the lead actor, something that should be encouraging to all the people who decry Broadway's current obsession with celebrity vehicles. And if numbers continue to decline and Hedwig closes before the new year, who cares? By every metric that matters, the production is an unqualified success, and exposed a great piece of contemporary musical theatre to a much larger audience than could ever fit in the show's original Off-Broadway home and the small spaces it is traditionally performed in. To borrow the famed Gershwin lyric, "who could ask for anything more?"

2014 Fall Preview: The Musicals

Erin Davie and Emily Padgett are set to reprise their roles as conjoined twins Violet and Daisy Hilton in the Broadway transfer of the acclaimed Kennedy Center production of the cult musical Side Show.

Although I am vehemently opposed to our nation's obsession with pumpkin everything and the attendant rush to have it be fall RIGHT NOW, there's no denying that the summer is coming to a close. The coming months will see a bevy of new Broadway productions begin performances, and since I've already examined the fall's crop of plays it's time to turn our attention to the type of theatre that is most synonymous with the Great White Way: the Broadway musical. While there aren't nearly as many musicals as plays premiering in the coming months, the industry seems to have collectively decided on a quality-over-quantity approach. (Almost) Every single musical, new or revived, sounds like an enticing evening at the theatre, and I am legitimately excited for them. So without further ado, here are the upcoming shows that will hopefully have us singing and dancing in the aisle this coming fall.

On the Town
Previews begin 9/20; Opening Night 10/16

While I'm not convinced the current Broadway economy can really support a big budget, old school song-and-dance fest like On the Town, I'm sure glad some producers have decided to give it a try. The Bernstein-Comden-Green musical perfectly fits my criteria for shows that merit a full scale revival (it's a well-liked musical that was a huge hit during its original run that isn't produced very often anymore), and it will be nice to see another dance musical on the Great White Way now that Newsies has ceased carrying the banner. I'm concerned On the Town has booked Spider-Man's old theatre (the freshly renamed Lyric), because I don't think the musical has the kind of drawing power to consistently sell a house that size, but hopefully the producers keep running costs low so it won't need to be a sell-out hit to survive.

The Last Ship
Previews begin 9/30; Opening Night 10/26

This is the one musical I am not interested in seeing, thanks mostly to the snooze-inducing preview performance on this year's Tony telecast. Multiple Grammy-winner Sting tries his hand at writing showtunes for this semi-autobiographical show about a shipbuilding town in England struggling to stave off financial ruin. As Bono and the Edge proved with their disastrous Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark, success and acclaim in the recording industry doesn't always translate to the stage, and quite honestly the entire affair sounds dull and uninteresting. In fairness, The Last Ship received encouraging (but by no means stellar) reviews during its out of town tryout, but it's going to need really strong buzz to convince me I want to sit through 2 1/2 hours of the same type of low-key material showcased on the Tonys.

Side Show
Previews begin 10/28; Opening Night 11/17

It took longer than I initially expected, but the well-reviewed Kennedy Center production of this 1997 cult-musical is officially coming to Broadway, and I couldn't be more excited. While the original production of Side Show only ran for a couple of months, the musical's reputation has only grown since its premature closing thanks to an intriguing premise - it tells the story of real-life conjoined twins Daisy and Violet Hilton - and a fantastic score. The show has been retooled, rethought, and rewritten by original authors Henry Krieger and Bill Russell along with the revival's director, Bill Condon (an Oscar winner who is also responsible for the fantastic film version of Krieger's Dreamgirls). I'm concerned about the show's financial prospects - dark musical dramas are a hard sell these days - but I will certainly be in attendance, and I hope this new production is the beginning of a long and prosperous second life for the ambitious property.

Honeymoon in Vegas
Previews begin 11/18; Opening Night 1/15/15

While I couldn't begin to tell you why a show The New York Times' Ben Brantley practically demanded transfer to Broadway has a two month preview period, the important thing is Honeymoon in Vegas is coming to bless us with another glorious Jason Robert Brown score. While this is the first full-fledged comedy the three-time Tony-winner has written, his previous works are rife with inventive lyrics and fun, uptempo melodies in songs like The Last 5 Year's "Summer in Ohio" or Songs for a New World's "Surabaya-Santa." It also marks the Broadway return of rising star Rob McClure, who will hopefully find a vehicle more worthy of his talents than the misguided Chaplin a few years back. If the show is as good as early buzz suggests, Honeymoon may give Brown his first commercial success, something that should help ease the sting of the criminally chilly reception his brilliant Bridges of Madison County received earlier this year. (Sidenote: both the show and leading lady Kelli O'Hara were *robbed* of Tony Awards this year!)


And there you have it! Those are all 16 productions scheduled to premiere on Broadway this fall. Which shows are you most excited about? Don't be afraid to let me know in the comments!

And in case you missed it, here are the previous two parts of my Fall Preview:

2014 Fall Preview: Play Revivals
2014 Fall Preview: New Plays

2014 Fall Preview: New Plays

A scene from the London production of The Curious Incident of the Dog in Night-time, one of several new works making the journey across the pond for the Fall season.

This past Monday saw the first preview performance of This Is Our Youth, meaning the Fall 2014 Broadway season is officially upon us. I've already taken a look at the many star-driven revivals coming to the Great White Way in the next few months; thankfully, unlike last fall's dismal showing of new plays (critical and commercial flops The Snow Geese and A Time to Kill), this fall has a few promising new works to balance out all those revivals. Hell, at least one of these plays is virtually guaranteed to be a sell-out hit, and given strong productions a couple of the others could also be at least critical if not necessarily commercial hits. So what's on deck for the fall? Find out below.

The Country House
Previews begin 9/9; Opening Night 10/2

One thing Manhattan Theatre Club can always be counted on for is attracting name talent to new works. I personally feel MTC's new plays trend a little too upper class and cerebral for their own good, but every once and a while the famed not-for-profit produces a daringly original and energetic piece like Venus in Fur. Unfortunately, The Country House sounds like par for the course at MTC (re: well-done but a little boring). Blythe Danner stars in this Donald Margulies play about a group of established and aspiring artists in a summer home in the Berkshires, with the explicit promise of "romantic outbursts" and "passionate soul-searching" along with an implicit promise of weighty discussions about art and culture. I actually enjoyed MTC's production of Margulies' Time Stands Still several seasons back, but this new work just sounds ponderous. I'm predicting respectable reviews and a respectable run, although it would take something unexpected for this play to take off and become a true hit.

The Curious Incident of the Dog in Night-time
Previews begin 9/10; Opening Night 10/5

The Curious Incident of the Dog in Night-time is the latest in a long, mostly distinguished line of new works originating in the West End. A hit oversees, the play centers on an incredibly intelligent but socially awkward teenage boy who is accused of killing his neighbor's dog, and his attempts to uncover the real killer. Coming to Broadway from London's prestigious National Theatre, this Olivier-winning play sounds a good deal more interesting and inventive than a lot of our home grown theatre, probably because England's government subsidized arts scene is a little more embracing of theatricality and invention (see War Horse). That said, some of these West End transfers lose something in the journey across the Atlantic, failing to live up to the hype generated by their reputations (see War Horse again). The reviews will probably dictate how well this does. If the critics embrace it, I expect it to settle in for a healthy run and potential Tony Awards; if they are lukewarm, it will probably close with relatively little fanfare. I am certainly curious, and just glad to see a high-minded drama that isn't solely concerned with the problems of upper class white people.

Disgraced
Previews begin 9/27; Opening Night 10/23

Like far too many plays, Disgraced concerns a group of upper class New Yorkers. But in this case, two of them are Muslim-American, and the play comes to Broadway having already won the 2013 Pulitzer Prize for Drama. Which is certainly enough to make anyone sit up and take notice, and of all the new plays scheduled for fall this is the one I am most interested in seeing. A contemporary take on a contemporary subject (the place of practicing Muslims in post 9/11 America), Disgraced sounds fresh and provocative, unlike the staid dramas that have taken over Broadway in the past few years. Barring some kind of creative implosion in the production, I expect this to be one of the more buzzed about works of the fall, and a clear early contender for Tony consideration come spring.

The River
Previews begin 10/31; Opening Night 11/16

The producers of Jez Butterworth's The River have scored the biggest casting coup of the fall: they somehow convinced box office magnet Hugh Jackman to star in this new play by a decidedly off-beat English playwright. Add in the fact that the Circle in the Square is one of Broadway's smallest houses and you have what is sure to be one of the hottest tickets in town. While The River's box office success is virtually assured - audiences have repeatedly proven they will turn up to see Jackman in just about anything - artistically the play is another story. I personally was underwhelmed by Butterworth's 2011 Tony-nominee Jerusalem (without the incomparable Mark Rylance that would have been a wasted 3 hours in the theatre), but many critics enjoyed the show and may again be charmed by Butterworth's work. I personally have no interest to see this play, which I suspect will be remembered much more as a financial success than an artistic one.

Constellations
Previews begin 12/16; Opening Night 1/13

Not much is known about this Manhattan Theatre Club production, other than the fact it will mark Oscar-nominee Jake Gyllenhaal's long-awaited Broadway debut. Something about the play must have enticed the notoriously choosey Gyllenhaal to Broadway, and it certainly wasn't MTC's not-for-profit pay scale. The official plot description of this West End transfer sounds heady - it is described as a "mind-bending" work that "defies the boundaries of the world we think we know" on MTC's website - which means it could either be an adventurous, inventive new work or a pretentious quagmire too caught up in its own premise to actually work. And while Gyllenhaal isn't a particular draw for me, he likely will be to a lot of other people, so hopefully this play turns out well.


And there you have the five new plays scheduled to open on Broadway in the next few months.  Check back soon for the final instalment of my Fall Preview series, which will focus on the musicals coming to Broadway between now and Christmas.  In the meantime, don't forget to catch up with part 1 of the series:

2014 Fall Preview: Play Revivals

2014 Fall Preview: The Play Revivals

Tony winners Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane are 2 of the many, many celebrities coming to Broadway this fall in limited run revivals.

The 2014-2015 Broadway stealthily began the week after the Tony Awards with the premiere of the ill-fated musical Holler If You Hear Me, something that already seems like a non-event in the grand scheme of things.  But we are getting ready to start the season proper, with several new productions beginning previews this month and many more scheduled from now until the lucrative holiday season.  And so I will be writing a three-part series previewing the upcoming season, examining all of the announced productions and giving a brief assessment of the probable level of success, both artistic and commercial.

We start with the plays, and like last year this coming season is jam packed with celebrity-led revivals.  Not everyone appreciates these shameless cash grabs (which can sometimes be of dubious artistic merit), although enough of them turn out well that I'm not about to dismiss the trend out of hand.  The productions also have a pretty good track record of making money, which the producers will hopefully pour back into riskier projects and not solely into more celebrity-led revivals.  So what revivals can star-struck theatregoers who need a break from singing and dancing look forward to this coming fall?  Find out below.

This Is Our Youth
Previews begin 8/17; Opening Night 9/11

This is one of those awkward situations where producers seem to think they've booked name talent but actually haven't.  Michael Cera is the biggest "name" here, and even in his home medium of film he has never been a consistent draw (the one-note screen persona he's cultivated probably doesn't help matters).  Cera and costars Kieran Culkin (younger brother of Home Alone's Mucauley Culkin) and Tavi Gevinson don't have nearly the drawing power as a Denzel Washington, Neil Patrick Harris or even a James Franco, which means that director Anna D. Shapiro better work the same kind of magic she did with August: Osage County if the show's to be successful.  The play, which explores themes of adolescence and maturity, sounds promising, but I'm taking a wait-and-see approach to this work.  If the buzz is good, I'm more likely to give it a chance.

You Can't Take It With You
Previews begin 8/26; Opening Night 9/28

This revival of the Pulitzer Prize-winning comedy has a much starrier cast than This Is Our Youth, headlined by the always engaging James Earl Jones.  Jones plays the head of the eccentric and slightly unhinged Sycamore clan as they entertain the more conventional family of their daughter's boyfriend.  The play, with a premise ripe for scene-stealing supporting turns by a cast of theatrical veterans, certainly has my interest, although it lacks the "it factor" which makes me feel compelled to buy a ticket.  Unless something goes horribly wrong, I expect this play to do good business and win decent reviews, although it remains to be seen if it will have the kind of legs to merit an extension and/or any serious Tony talk.

It's Only a Play
Previews begin 8/28; Opening Night 10/9

Terrance McNally's last Broadway outing Mothers and Sons left me cold, but the upcoming revival of his 1982 comedy It's Only a Play is one of my most anticipated productions of the fall season.  The cast assembled by the producers and director Jack O'Brien is stacked with name talent, most of whom have at least one Tony nomination (if not a win) to their name.  The idea of seeing such noted clowns as Nathan Lane, Megan Mullaly, and Matthew Broderick ham it up in the farcical-sounding work (about a Broadway producer anxiously awaiting the reviews for his latest play) is exactly the kind of thing I and a lot of people would be willing to pay big bucks for.  Unless it gets absolutely terrible reviews, I suspect this will be one of the theatrical events of the fall.

Love Letters
Previews begin 9/13; Opening Night 9/18

An last minute addition to the fall season, this revival of the A.R. Gurney drama about the lifelong friendship between an artist and a politician sounds like a complete snoozefest.  The entire play is told via a series of letters the pair exchange, meaning it is essentially a series of monologues read aloud to the audience.  I have never enjoyed Gurney's work; he focuses so specifically on the concerns of upper class whites it can be hard to relate to his plays if you don't come from a similar background.  The gimmick of this revival is that it will feature a rotating cast of name actors, starting with Brain Dennehy and Mia Farrow and eventually including the likes to Carol Burnett, Alan Alda, and Diana Rigg.  I personally think this revival is ill-advised (the rotating guest stars didn't do much to help After Midnight's sales, and these stars have even shorter runs that will be almost impossible to properly advertise) and likely doomed to failure.  I will certainly be skipping it.

The Real Thing
Previews begin 10/2; Opening Night 10/30

Roundabout's productions have been incredibly hit or miss over the past several seasons, so without more information it is impossible to know where this revival of Tom Stoppard's heady drama will land on the quality spectrum.  It does have the appealing prospect of Ewan McGreggor in his Broadway debut, with a supporting cast that includes Maggie Gyllenhall and Cynthia Nixon to give it both theatrical credibility and even more Hollywood sheen.  I'm expecting a competently staged and acted evening at the theatre, although I will admit that it isn't very high up on my list of things to see.

A Delicate Balance
Previews begin 10/20; Opening Night 11/20

Along with It's Only a Play, A Delicate Balance looks poised to become one of the more buzzed about Broadway productions of the fall.  Featuring Glenn Close's first Broadway appearance in 20 years, Tony-winner and multiple Oscar-nominee Close is joined by Tony- and Emmy-winner John Lithgow in this Edward Albee drama.  Directed by Pam MacKinnon, who worked wonders with the 2012 revival of Albee's Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, this production contains great actors tackling a great script under the helm of a great director.  Assuming the stars are available and willing, I can easily see this extending for a month or two past its planned February closing date (which will give me more time to actually go see it).

The Elephant Man
Previews begin 11/7; Opening Night 12/7

This production is a wildcard for me.  On one hand, Bradley Cooper has racked up multiple Oscar nominations over the past couple of years, proving he is a much more versatile actor than his lowbrow performance in The Hangover would lead you to believe.  The Elephant Man is a respected property in the theatrical world that is a major showcase for its star, who plays the deformed John Merrick without the benefit of prosthetics or makeup.  But I wonder if director Scott Ellis, who is also directing You Can't Take It With You and On the Twentieth Century next season, is perhaps stretching himself too thin to really give this project the level of focus it deserves.  Cooper's name is probably enough to ensure good box office, but I am very curious to see what the verdict is on the artistic merits of this production.


And those are all the play revivals you can look forward to between now and Christmas.  Check back soon to see my take on this fall's upcoming new plays.

Should Race Be a Selling Point?

Norm Lewis made history as the first black Broadway Phantom when he joined the Broadway company of The Phantom of the Opera in May.  And while that is certainly noteworthy, I can't help but feel that maybe we are making *too* big of a deal about it.

Recently, some singer/talk show host I had never heard of was cast as the latest headliner in the terrible revival of Rodgers and Hammerstein's Cinderella.  Her name is Keke Palmer, and she will be Broadway's first black Cinderella.  This news story bothered me greatly.

Now, let's be clear:  I am most certainly NOT upset that an African-American woman will be headlining a Broadway musical about a fairy tale princess.  As a person of color who once dreamed of being an actor, I am all too aware of the difficulties facing ethnic actors today.  While we are slowly seeing more diversity in entertainment, the sad fact remains that a lot of casting directors still won't consider an ethnic actor for a part that doesn't explicitly call for that ethnicity.  Furthermore, the parts that do require an actor of color often make skin tone the role's defining characteristic, as if that is the only thing which could possibly necessitate casting a non-white performer.  And since most subsequent productions have a tendency to mimic the casting of the original, if the original actor wasn't black (or Latino, or Asian-American, etc.), then actors of those ethnicities often aren't seriously considered for the role even if race has zero bearing on the story.  So any instance of a traditionally white role going to an ethnic performer is something I am all for.

No, what bothers me about Ms. Palmer's casting is that the producers and press made such a big deal about her being the "first black Cinderella" on Broadway.  Every story went out of the way to mention Palmer's ethnicity, which makes me believe this is something that was explicitly pointed out in the press release as a way of drumming up extra attention.  Because honestly, the 4th replacement in a revival of a musical with middling box office probably wouldn't even merit mention if not for this one tidbit.  I will choose to believe that the producers of Cinderella didn't cast Palmer solely because of her race, but they sure don't mind using her skin color to get some extra publicity and perhaps stroke their egos in a self-congratulatory, "look-how-progressive-we-are" way.

My problem with this is that it makes skin color the defining characteristic of this actress.  The selling point of Palmer's casting is not her talent or her previous accomplishments; it is her skin color, something she has absolutely no control over.  This is even more baffling considering Cinderella, which won an Actor's Equity award for the diversity of its ensemble, has several other ethnic actors in principal roles without feeling the need to point out their heritage.  No one mentioned that Ann Harada is the first Asian-American Stepsister.  You know why?  Because it is Harada's talent that is her most important asset, not her ancestry, which is only one component of the many qualities and characteristics that make her unique.

A similar thing happened recently when Norm Lewis took over the title role in The Phantom of the Opera, Broadway's longest running musical.  Every news outlet, even those that normally don't cover Broadway, was suddenly talking about Phantom again because Lewis is the first black actor to play the role on Broadway in the show's 26 year run.  And while that is certainly an achievement, and a cool bit of theatrical trivia, why did that have to be the defining piece of news about his casting?  Again, my problem with spinning the story this way is that it places the emphasis on Lewis' skin color, something he has zero control over, and not his talent, something he has honed and sharpened over nearly 3 decades of performing.

Defining anyone primarily by their skin color is reductive (and borderline insulting).  By calling extra attention to race, we continue to train future generations to notice it and use it as a way to define people.  Even if the focus on Palmer and Lewis's heritage is well-intentioned, as a mixed-race American it makes me vaguely uneasy.  It deemphasizes individuality, and encourages people to make assumptions based on someone's outer appearance.

To me, the ideal treatment of race is how the subject was handled in Rent.  That show featured an incredibly diverse cast without making their diversity the central focus.  All of the various characters in Rent are treated as people first, with subtle nods to their ethnic backgrounds that provided extra spice without becoming their defining quality.  Very little is explicitly mentioned about any characters' heritage, meaning the show could theoretically be cast with any combination of actors.  It is generally cast to mirror the ethnic breakdown of the original cast, which goes back to the lack of imagination on casting directors' part, but that is an issue for another blog.  The pertinent point here is that it was diverse without making race its defining characteristic, one of the many ways in which the show was so groundbreaking.

Or to use a currently running example, look at Disney's The Lion King.  It features a largely black cast, which makes sense given the African setting and director Julie Taymor's wholehearted embrace of tribal design aesthetics.  Yet the show doesn't once call attention to the character's blackness (probably because they're all actually lions, but that is beside the point).  As Taymor has said in various interviews, The Lion King is a show that is not about race and yet all about race.  As she astutely points out, to white audiences it is the same story they know and love from the movie, and the ethnicities of the actors are a non-issue.  But to black audiences, it is very much the story of a black king trying to win back his kingdom, and sends a powerful message that people of color can be noble kings and queens too.  The brilliance of the show is that it allows for this reading without doing anything to emphasize it, which makes it even more progressive than the shows that call attention to their inclusiveness.

There is no denying that Broadway could use more diversity.  The country continues to become more ethnically varied, but the principal characters in most Broadway shows remain steadfastly white.  I am all for actors like Palmer and Lewis breaking barriers, but I think when we call too much attention to it we only exacerbate the problem.  I hope directors continue to consider and cast actors of all ethnicities in all roles (provided the show isn't explicitly about race and racism), but cease to call attention to the fact that they are doing so.  Calling attention to it ultimately reinforces the notion that race is something to obsess over and define people by, and that kind of thinking helps no one.  Trying to get brownie points for your affirmative action casting decisions is just tacky, and devalues the talent of the people you do hire.

Revive This: The Diva Edition

Several months ago, I posted what was intended to be the first in a semi-regular series about musicals I would love to see revived.  Now, many moons later, I have two more shows I'm dying to see some Broadway producer take a risk on.  One of the positive things about this upcoming season is the three announced revivals (On the Town, On the Twentieth Century, and The King and I) are all shows which, in my opinion, merit Broadway revivals.  They are respected properties that aren't produced with a great amount of frequency, and it has been close to two decades since any of them have had a major New York production, making them ripe to be refreshed and reimagined for a new generation.  (The much-rumored but yet-to-be-officially-confirmed transfer of the Kennedy Center's Side Show also fits this description, and I really hope producers announce a theatre and start date soon.)

Here are some other shows I'd like to see tackled on Broadway sooner rather than later:

My Fair Lady

If done right, a revival of My Fair Lady could "make it rain" in Spain and everywhere else; I think there's a lot of money to be made there.

My Fair Lady is, for me, one of the most frustrating musicals in existence.  The score is exquisite, overflowing with classic tunes in the Golden Age mold that just make my heart sing.  "I Could Have Danced All Night" has been attempted by almost every aspiring soprano in existence, but when someone really nails it the song is absolutely thrilling.  The characters and relationships are also much more complex than in your typical musical, and the show raises some really interesting issues regarding identity, appearance and self worth.

Unfortunately, the show is also alarmingly misogynistic.  Henry Higgins is an unforgiveable lout of a character who uses and abuses Eliza at almost every turn because he sees her as a thing instead of as a person, and unlike in George Bernard Shaw's Pygmalion, the musical's Eliza simply puts up with it.  I can't even watch the final minutes of the generally stellar film version because Rex Harrison's smug little grin as he says "Fetch me my slippers" upon Eliza's return makes me want throw everything within reach at the screen.

I would love to see a contemporary (female?) director and cast tackle this undeniably important musical through a modern, more feminist viewpoint.  A first rate revival could provide a blueprint for how future productions can address the narrative's disturbing social underpinnings, similar to how contemporary productions of Shakespeare's The Taming of the Shrew have to find a way to keep Kate strong while she essentially advocates female submission.  Even though I love a lot of Alan Jay Lerner's book, I wouldn't be opposed to slight revisions of the show's final moments to make it a more clearly about Eliza coming to realizer her own value independent of any male influence.  If it was up to me, the show would end with Higgins sobbing while he plays the recording of Eliza, which would simultaneously allow Eliza to embrace her own self worth (by refusing to put up with his bullshit) and make Higgins just a tad more sympathetic, since if played correctly the moment could be Higgins realizing that he did this to himself and not just sobbing because he didn't get the girl.

Caveat: I have ZERO interest in Clive Davis' proposed revival, because his statements about the show and Broadway in general prove he has no understanding of either the theatre or the property.  First of all, its hard to work in a medium as collaborative as theatre when you think no one has done anything worthwhile in decades.  And I don't understand why anyone would think Anne Hathaway, as brilliant as she was in Les Miserables, has the vocal ability to sing Eliza eight times a week.  (I will concede that Colin Firth would likely be an excellent Henry Higgins.)  I want a legitimate production starring actors with legitimate vocal and theatrical talent - someone like Gentleman's Guide Lisa O'Hare or a young Kelli O'Hara - and I want it done big.  Lincoln Center would certainly have the money to pour into a lavish physical production with a full orchestra (which would be essential), and their go-to director Bartlett Sher has proven that when you approach a musical as a drama first and foremost you can reap stellar results (see: South Pacific, The Bridges of Madison County).


Hello, Dolly!

Carol Channing is so synonymous with Hello, Dolly! that producers have been hesitant to produce a major Broadway mounting without him.

Admittedly, part of my reason for wanting a Hello, Dolly! revival is that I have never seen it, and I'm curious what all the fuss is about.  But that larger-than-life reputation is also what makes Dolly such a prime candidate for a Broadway revival.  The show was a phenomenon when it premiered, and although its enduring popularity has led to plenty of regional and amateur productions, it has also caused the show to be looked down upon by certain segments of the theatre-going public.  Because the show is so associated with school productions and low-budget dinner theatre, a common conception is that it is not the type of show "serious" artists would waste their time on.

To which I say "hogcock!" (Tina Fey's brilliant portmanteau of "hogwash" and "poppycock," as heard on the dearly departed 30 Rock.)  Dolly is practically begging for a major New York production featuring the industry's best talent to restore the show's reputation as a fantastic example of musical comedy writing.  Also, the show is so closely tied to memories of Carol Channing - who originated the title role to Tony-winning effect and played it on Broadway and off for over 30 years - that it would be nice to see a different actress be given the chance to put her own stamp on it.

I believe the inevitable comparisons to Channing are the main reason no New York producer has been brave enough to tackle the show without her (the only Broadway outing not starring Channing was a brief, all black revival with Pearl Bailey in 1975).  You would have to cast a name star, someone who could sell tickets while still having the theatrical chops to actual pull off the role.  There was a brief period a few years back where producers were rumored to be courting Patti LuPone for a planned revival, but that production failed to materialize.  I would suggest a different bit of casting: Kristin Chenoweth.  The Tony-winner has not been shy about her desire to play Dolly, and I believe at this point in her career she has the mainstream clout to actual make a revival financially viable.  Like Channing, Chenoweth is a bit of an oddball comedienne, but in a very different mold - which would help limit comparisons - and she certainly has the comedic and vocal abilities to tackle the gargantuan role.  Plus, in my experience, seeing anyone perform their dream role is generally worth it, because they will pour every bit of themselves into the process.

Are you listening, Broadway?  Someone lock down Chenoweth before she goes back to Hollywood and her concert work.  Surround her with top tier theatrical talent and maybe one other bit of appropriate stunt casting to help guarantee ticket sales.  Don't skimp on the production costs, but don't go crazy either (please, no projections!).   I would be first in what I suspect would be a very long line to see her.