I was in New York the other day and had the chance to see Curtains. It stars David Hyde Pierce with a score by Kander and Ebb.
It hasn’t gotten a lot of attention. It’s not a great musical. But it’s a very good musical. And watching the cast put everything into it has a strange effect on me and I think on everyone who loves theater. You walk out of a good musical in a giddy mood of emotional catharsis. You’ve laughed and cried and been in awe of the creativity and talent that goes into the score and the choreography and the singing.
There are very few human experiences that leave you emotionally drained and joyous the way a musical does when it’s done well. Why is that? What is there about a musical that has that effect? And a second puzzle–if you film a stage musical it’s not just not as good as seeing a musical live, it’s awful. Why is that? What is it about being there in person that has such an emotional kick?
Share
{ 16 comments }
Do I smell a new econtalk podcast brewing?
Now were talking! … or at least singing our heart out. Clearly it is better to participate as an audience of a musical than just being a movie watcher but, given the right circumstances, and the right company, I would not be so dismissive of the filmed musicals; which also have the clear advantage of being able to be seen over and over again, without bankrupting you. To me the world is a better place because My Fair Lady and Oklahoma made it to the big screen, and I sure hope the professor doesn’t mind that.
…and how can it be so utterly uninteresting and non-emotionally-involved, let alone drained, for me?
Russ – I saw Curtains about a month ago at the very same theater. True, it isn't the Citizen Kane of musicals. But I sure enjoyed it. Glad that you did, too.
-Ryan
Per,
I love My Fair Lady the movie. And Cabaret.
But a video of a staged musical is blah. Horrible.
Shawn,
That's another good question. Why do some people love musicals and other people hate them?
When people sing their voices are louder, more articulated, their chests puff up, the facial expressions change and become overly comedic or tragic. The sounds are booming if experienced live in intimate surroundings and the effects are greater if music isn't too loud the overshadow the voices. The net effect is that the singer becomes twice or triple human, a bigger character right there and then. It's intimidating, fascinating, and exhilarating all the same time. It must go back to a time when the only way to tell a story was to physically impersonate it.
Don't be so quick to dismiss the value of a filmed musical. Personally I value them highly over the staged versions.
If it is a staged version, my wife will drag me to see and hear it.
If it is a filmed version, she can watch it when I am out of town on business.
The filmed version thus becomes far superior to the staged version.
I'm curious what filmed staged musicals you've actually seen?
The only ones I can recall seeing (off the top of my head) are Sunday in the Park with George and Sweeney Todd, and I've never seen either of those on stage, so I can't compare. I definitely appreciated Burton's movie of Todd more than the film of the original stage production. I attributed that to Burton sensibly cutting the fat (and a couple of good songs, admittedly) from the show, but perhaps the show just didn't come across nearly as well because I wasn't in the room with the singers.
For my taste there is an additional (related?) question — why are soundtrack albums (of proper film versions) never as good as the original cast album? In theory, the soundtrack album has everything going for it — more time to record the music, and access to a larger and more varied orchestra. But for my taste, in practice this usually just seems to make the music seem over-rehearsed and bloated.
ah…alright, perhaps it's a generational thing (dangerfield no offense). I recently saw Across the Universe, and that was a great film, largely a musical.
Haven't seen Sweeney Todd, so can't comment on that…though I'm going to have to to test my hypothesis.
Sol…is it really better on the original score, or is your "first experience" of the film coloring your appreciation for the music? I almost never like second-versions of songs (live, if I heard studio first, and vice versa, or "bigger full-effects studio" if I heard "local stripped-down studio" first), so perhaps the slight differences are getting on your nerves. Of course, my appreciation of Across the Universe sort of annuls this, because that whole film is Beatles songs. Go figure.
When people sing… a time when the only way to tell a story was to physically impersonate it.” Posted by: Unit | Jun 16, 2008
Wow, we sure have a knowledgeable fan here. A real PhD in musicals. I am truly impressed by Unit’s very accurate analysis of what has to be going on in the minds of all of us who like to belt away a song, come shower time, on beautiful mornings.
“If it is a filmed version, she can watch it when I am out of town on business.
” Posted by: vidyohs | Jun 16, 2008.
Now we can perhaps understand it better, a suspicious lack of joie de vivre might explain some of his postings…unless of course that smiley about the out of town business, really means vydyohs sneaking away to see Oklahoma for the umpteenth time, not wanting to pay a ticket for his wife who has to settle for a video.
P K,
Don't know and can't speak for this vydyohs of whom you speak, but, vidyohs is an extremely complex character who is impossible to label.
vidyohs doesn't like musicals because, though he loves fiction and even some Fantasy, he could never suspend his rational mind enough to enjoy a story where two typially uninteresting characters suddenly burst into song about their dullness and the whole group of (townsmen, campers, store customers, field workers, sailors, gun-fighters, voo-doo villagers, priests, etc.) people near them suddenly know all the words to the same song and proceed to dance in, around, and with the two dulluards. Yaaaaaaawn!
Give me a good book by S.M. Stirling, Greg Bear, Orson Scott Card, Jaquline Carey, Peter Danielson, et. al., and let the little woman watch her girlies flick.
This is a fascinating topic. I think the points Prof. Roberts makes about live musicals are true for all theater. (I'm mainly an opera fan, but I also like the other forms.) My guess is that seeing a live performance of anything dramatic (as opposed to a concert) forces the viewer either to totally commit or totally wall himself off. You can't half-participate the way you can with movies or TV (unless perhaps you're in the cheap seats of a huge theater). As a consequence, those of us who do commit actually *live* through the drama — which significantly takes place in real time (an actor can't walk across a stage livingroom any faster than you or I can walk across a real livingroom) — in a way we typically don't when watching something filmed.
As evidence of this, I offer my own experience with opera. Whenever I go to see an opera, I always have a moment of resistance when the performance starts, a moment when my immediate reaction is "this is just too fake, I can't accept this." Within a few minutes, that passes (unless the performance is really awful), and very soon I'm as comfortable in the staged reality as I am in my "real" reality.
For all my fun poking but true comments above, I understand those who are moved by live performances over canned. I just happen to be one of those that do not see any difference between a live stage musical or a canned one, they both seem devoid of personality to me.
Now music is another thing. I typically hate large concerts. You can get me to go to a club or a performance in the open, such as a park; but, only if I know there aren't going to be thousands there.
My wife and I frequently attend Blue Grass festivals in the small towns around houston and because of her experiences in Sweet Adelines we find the best music is in the parking lot before and during the stage performances. In the parking lot you find the musicians "wood-shedding" (acoustical jamming) with participants from other groups on songs that they may or many not do on stage. They don't have their performance faces on and are doing what they love. Far superior to what is going on inside the music hall. And the listeners do not suddenly break out in spontaneous, yet coreographed, dance routines as we join them in song.
Musicians jamming late at night after the gig is done and before the bar closes is when you hear some of the best music you'll ever hear.
The answer to Russ's question all comes down to the fact that humans truly are individual and we are all generally moved by different things, or the same things in different fashion. No mystery there.
For me the experience has a lot to do with sound quality and volume.
Song evokes something in the deepest psyche of humans. We sing to babies to soothe them and it works. Songs on the radio randomly recall people and events from long ago. Interpretation of music is intrinsically tied to the hippocampus, an area of the brain tied to memory, learning, and emotion.
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro99/web1/Sancar.html
The staging of a successful theatrical production is very different from the requirements for what passes as a successful theater. Plays and musicals must engage the audience directly and the give and take from the actors and audience should not be lightly discounted. As a former stage actor, the audience is the whole reason to be there, and I know that I gave a better performance when the audience was more responsive.
Film, however, does not rely on this interplay. Good film requires the plot to keep moving, tight shots with narrow focus, and larger ensemble casts rarely work.
shawn, it's not the version I heard first I like best — in many (most?) cases, I didn't hear the original first, but it is my favorite version now. For that matter, several times now I've successfully convinced my wife to switch allegiance to older recordings of material which she had come to love.
I should add, it's not a property specific to Broadway, either — it's the original cast which is best, and only sometimes is the original cast the Broadway cast.
(I will concede it is probably stubborn familiarity which leads me to prefer the original Broadway cast of My Fair Lady to the original London cast recording featuring the exact same leads and better recording equipment.)
{ 1 trackback }