|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2016 11:26:46 GMT
I think I see it as that on-going linage of "new approach" or "innovative" musical theatre- WSS through Hair, through Rent, ITH etc etc. Every now and again there's a leap or direction change and I always think whichever was 'your' one you see bits of in the next. So for me I see Rent leading to ITH in musical style (taking on elements of popular music of the day, telling stories the composer experienced etc) same argument can be made for many of course as it's all relative to personal experience.
I've always somewhat viewed ITH has LMM's 'Rent' as in his first piece as a young composer not without faults (as Rent was, but with the luxury of a living composer to carry on tweaking) and then Hamilton as the more matured, more invested in (in terms of time for the composer and from others as a now established success) Which always brings me back to the 'what ifs' of Larson, and what Musical theatre landscape would look like were they both writing today.
Anyway I digress, I have many an academic essay in my head about that sort of thing...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2016 12:15:26 GMT
Well it's similar to WSS in that it's about Latino people and it features a lot of heavy choreography. It's similar to Rent in that it focuses on mainly young people living financially unstable lives in New York. I would say both WSS and Rent are much grittier than ITH though. The worst thing that happens in ITH is an old woman passing away. That vs. drugs, AIDS and gang violence is a huge difference. Lin has said he wanted to have an example of musical theatre that features Latino characters that AREN'T violent or committing crimes, the kind of people he grew up amongst. It is arguable whether Miranda would even be a theatre composer if it wasn't for Jonathan Larson and Rent though. He talks about Rent's influence on him at 14:36 in this video He also wrote this great article for the New York Times about Jonathan Larson's influence on him back when he was playing him in Larson's autobiographical musical Tick Tick Boom. www.nytimes.com/2014/06/22/theater/lin-manuel-miranda-pays-tribute-to-jonathan-larson.html |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2016 12:19:26 GMT
Rent and In The Heights are both, in their ways, about gentrification, which isn't really a theme that turns up musicals often, to my knowledge. Also neither of them are "traditional" musical theatre in sound, and also there's an element of capturing the public spirit and imagination in the big way (though I'd argue that Hamilton is more akin to Rent than In The Heights when looking at this particular element).
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2016 13:48:54 GMT
I would also say that LMM wouldn't be a composer without Larson. Both in terms of 'gateway opening' or 'genre shifts' in the theatrical landscape, and in personal influence. In particular the approach of taking musical sound to a new direction, and drawing on other personal influences (rock of late 80s/early 90s for Larson and rap hip hop for LMM) Both also watched the world around them change dramatically-gentrification as Baemax says (and no I don't know any others that cover that as a focal point either) and in terms of life-changing elements (AIDS, drugs etc) I agree that ITH is something of a 'lighter' subject matter but there's also the more serious underlying narrative of immigration and fitting in etc.
I'm willing to go out on a limb and say Hamilton is the first since Rent to capture public imagination in this way, and for me (having y'know written a damn PhD on Rent) it's really fascinating to watch the way the public engages this time around in the age of social media, online engagement etc in comparisson to how we did it 'back in the day' in that way also Rent was one of the first to have fan online engagement albeit in a very different way, as well as the downright hysteria at in terms of tickets sales/clamouring for tickets (and Rent remembering how significant the Rent rush line was back in the day with people camping out etc)
All in all I have a LOT of thoughts on this matter. And as much as I love LMM it also makes me sad because I always get into a 'what if' cycle with Larson...If ITH is LMM's Rent, and he followed with Hamilton (having matured as a writer etc) what would Larson have done next.
It's all very fascinating to my particularly nerdy brain on this issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by d'James on Apr 7, 2016 13:51:15 GMT
Has Lin-Manuel seen the London production?
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Apr 7, 2016 14:19:08 GMT
No way "Rent." That show has always nauseated me - bunch of irresponsible twentysomethings in troubles of their own making mostly because they appear seemingly spoilt to the point of infantilism. "In The Heights" has real grit. Anything anyone gets is through work, with a little luck everyone is entitled to. The characters and issues are real and immediate. I'd guess that "West Side Story" may have had a level of reality to it as well, when it first opened. If I HAD to choose between the two quoted in this thread, then WSS is a bit closer. That said, I think ITH is something unique and very, very special. Much as I enjoyed "Kinky Boots," I'd have given the Olivier to ITH by a mile.
The Rent thing is in the sound of the show, not the story. But, really, TM, your take on Rent... Of course AIDS does have a strong personal responsibility component but does that make it less devastating and, ultimately, less tragic? Some of the Rent characters are playing at being bohemians while others are genuine street people. It's a mix. No one is infantile, they're trying to cope with dying, a fairly big deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by RudyGrey on Apr 7, 2016 16:44:15 GMT
Has Lin-Manuel seen the London production? No, but his endearing parents represented him at the Southwark Playhouse opening: Lin-Manuel Miranda himself did visit with the cast shortly after the SWP run, but I don't think he's made it to the Kings Cross version so far. |
|
840 posts
|
Post by Steffi on Apr 7, 2016 17:00:28 GMT
Lin's parents have seen the King's Cross production too so they are repeat visitors. :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2016 17:44:10 GMT
TM, your take on Rent... Of course AIDS does have a strong personal responsibility component but does that make it less devastating and, ultimately, less tragic? Some of the Rent characters are playing at being bohemians while others are genuine street people. It's a mix. No one is infantile, they're trying to cope with dying, a fairly big deal. Being honest, Mallardo, I switched off at about the point where two goons carrying a cine camera started childishly waving their heads around and singing about "how we gonna pay rent." I had actually forgotten about the AIDS stuff, and do recognise that as serious. But yes, I'm afraid I just found the overall show juvenile and didn't care enough to even remember the plot too well. I think that's why it failed in London, as a lot of Brits couldn't get the vibe you are talking about either. To be fair, this point gets brought up a lot about them refusing to pay rent. But the plot line is that their landlord tells them they can live there rent free and then goes back on his word which surely would anger anyone. Yes the sensible thing to do is to get a job and pay the rent, but it's not exactly an interesting storyline for a musical. It also reflects Larson's life. He lived in poverty, didn't have enough money to pay for the heating and lived in an awful apartment. He worked only the amount of shifts as a waiter as he had to to afford to eat so that he could have the rest of his time to focus on writing theatre. If he hadn't have done that, he wouldn't have finished Rent before he died and who knows if In the Heights would be here for us to discuss as a result. It's also very important to remember the show was unfinished as Jonathan died before the show even started off-broadway and they didn't want to change his work drastically without his permission. I'm sure it would have been a much more polished final product if he had lived. I think it failed in London because it's a very New York story and we didn't have the advantage of the internet and social media to spread the word/hype. This is not a problem now with shows like The Book of Mormon and Hamilton. But I went to the concert tour of Rent a few years ago and the audience was sold out and probably the most enthusiastic I've ever sat in, despite it being an awful production of the show. So it definitely has its fan base here. emicardiff, I completely agree on wishing we could see what Larson would have done next. To think he was the age Lin is now, he had so much left in him. The only comfort is that he left such a legacy. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2016 18:06:14 GMT
Thanks Snutte (and Mallardo) I think it's worth noting as well it's only Roger and Mark saying 'We're not gonna pay Rent' and it's one small sub plot in a myriad of others. And there were people like them squatting in the 90s (heck I know of a few middle class hippie squatters myself today...) but also that Larson wrote an adaptation (or stole it if you believe Sarah Schulman's take on it) of La Boheme. No adaptation is perfect because you end up sewing together bits and pieces that especially if modernising.
The issue of AIDS to Larson was very serious, he lost many friends. And he was also at the time an 'alternative' voice on AIDS in theatre in what had long been a white, middle class gay male narrative (the latter rightly so of course) Larson brought a younger voice and brought different groups (drug users, straight men and women) and ethnicities. Did he do any of this perfectly? no, but he did it. And for many of that generation Rent did become a vehicle to talk about or learn about AIDS (particularly those a bit younger who weren't old enough to be that aware of the first wave of the crisis)
And AIDS and plot aside, Larson was offering a real alternative to the mega-musicals that were dominating at the time and showed that you could have a mega hit with something different.
As for why it "failed" in London, I have approximatly 10, 000 words of a PhD on the subject (I wrote on the London transfers of Angels in America and Rent) and my argument has always been it didn't "fail" it had a respectable if not spectacular run, but could never hope to hit the same cultural zeitgeist as it did at that particular moment, in that particular set of factors in New York. Ask many a British musical theatre nerd who was a teen around that time or a little later, and I'm pretty sure a good percentage say it was still an important work for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2016 7:56:41 GMT
Cheers Theatremonkey. I totally get that some people don't 'connect' with it in any way, and it's great to have such an engaged and reasonable discussion (as ever with your good self  ) what frustrates me is people who dismiss it entierly. There's plenty of supposedly 'great' works that I just don't get either-be boring if we all did. Now Rent: Remixed. There is a thing I can agree was a travesty... Anyway, back to In the Heights. I'm clearly tired and emotional today as I was nearly sobbing in my car on the way to work this morning listening to Alabanza. I think I need a holiday... |
|
2,702 posts
|
Post by viserys on Apr 8, 2016 8:36:52 GMT
My guess is that "Rent" - much like "La Boheme" on which it is based - appeals to a certain mindset / age group. I was basically the characters' age when Rent first came out and absolutely loved the characters - Mark and Roger with their desire to find self-fulfillment as artists (I was dreaming of writing my one big bestseller novel at the time, too), Mimi with her hunger for life, Angel with his selfless kindness and so on.
But as I grew older, got my first proper fulltime jobs, built up a typical boring-but-safe adult life, I realized that I began to see things more from Benny's perspective and thought that he DID make his friends a good offer and their protest was juvenile and daft and why didn't they pull up their pants and get a decent job anyway?
I will never forget the emotional impact Rent had on me when I first saw it live in London with the guys from Broadway who moved me to tears, but I'm not sure how I would react to it now, were it new to me. And I can fully understand that not everyone - whether from age or mindset - would find the characters likeable.
Not sure why it didn't do better in London than it it, but it may have something to do with the British "down-to-earthness" compared to overwrought American emotionality? While I love Rent, I tend to prefer the blunt British approach to that particular American hand-wringing drama with his larger-than-life emotions.
Sorry, back to In the Heights (which I saw in New York and left me pretty cold, admittedly).
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2016 9:03:57 GMT
Exactly! as with many shows my relationship has changed with it over time (in this case helped/hindered by intensive study of it) but I'll always remember that love I had for it and the emotional impact it had-I saw it for the second time a few months after my Dad died and to this day I think only one other performance of anything has left me so emotional. As with anything it's a combination of us as audience and what we see on stage.
ITH left me cold the first time I saw it too, in NY, but I've grown to love the recording and look forward to the London production when I finally see it next month!
|
|
2,702 posts
|
Post by viserys on Apr 8, 2016 9:34:57 GMT
With all the love for ITH here on the board (and my own love for Hamilton) I am admittedly considering seeing it again in London and to also give the CD another spin. I think what bugged me about it was that it was all such light-weight fluff. I could see how LMM wanted to paint a positive picture of the Latino community in the "barrio", but it just seemed a tad too light-weight and glossy to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2016 10:35:28 GMT
Regarding Rent in London I found the British replacement cast much better than the original (mostly American) one, they seemed to me to be phoning in their performances after what must have been a long time doing the show.
As for the show itself, although in my thirties at the time I found it easy to empathise with the characters, I was past that age but I'd been there so could remember what it was like to feel the way they did.
|
|
642 posts
|
Post by Stasia on Apr 8, 2016 10:47:50 GMT
may I just be a bit offtop and overemotional here? REading the couple of last pages in that topic makes me love you all and being very happy being able to discuss my fave shows in such a deep and interesting way.
You are the best!
Back to ITH-Rent paralles: for me they two also parralle. In the impact they have on me. I am also, like people here, a bit "overgrew" Rent's characters turning into proper Benny but I still remember my thoughts and feelings when "no day but today" motto helped me with many life decisions in my early twenties. I stopped being a lawyer and started working in a theatre, to start with!
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicholas on Apr 8, 2016 12:00:43 GMT
may I just be a bit offtop and overemotional here? REading the couple of last pages in that topic makes me love you all and being very happy being able to discuss my fave shows in such a deep and interesting way. You are the best! THe thing I love most about the board is that we can have these topics about very sensitive and occasionally personal stories in a truly discursive way. Like the way diversity was discussed in the other thread - everyone heard everyone else out, and everyone responded thoughtfully and with decency, agreeing where they agreed and respectfully disagreeing where they disagreed. On any other board, about subjects much less sensitive than diversity or AIDS, the insults would have flown like arrows and at least three people would have been blocked. On here, an actual discussion! It's lovely to read, it always is. Plus you lot have areas of expertise (like extraordinarily varied, culturally rich and/or globetrotting lives, or actually being a writer no less, or PhDs on Rent!) that most of us can only dream of and it's wonderful when you employ them - it's also lovely how open everyone tends to be about their history and personal relationship to shows. Perhaps even more than that, it's all of your willingness to treat every musical with the intellectual nous criticism normally only saves for relatively radical new plays that makes me value this place more than I value actual criticism in any medium anymore. GUsh over. |
|
|
|
Post by SamB (was badoerfan) on Apr 8, 2016 12:42:47 GMT
£15 Band A tickets available today only via lastminute.com
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2016 13:37:43 GMT
I love that we can have this discussion too! I'm sure a few of us remember the days of the Broadwayworld West end board (or setting foot in the main board which I only look at now for a real last resort of information!) but I think so far we've managed to foster a real engaged community here which is great!
Also I'm at ITH on 7th May if anyone else is going/planning on it do shout!
|
|
330 posts
|
Post by charliec on Apr 9, 2016 19:29:42 GMT
The main Heights cast did a mini gig at the Theatre Cafe this afternoon, place was totally packed full of people who knew all the words. New Vanessa, Christine Allado, sounded great. They did all the big solo numbers and Duets. David Bedella was there eating a McDonald's moments before singing Inutil the best I've ever heard him do it!
|
|
642 posts
|
Post by AddisonMizner on Apr 11, 2016 16:56:44 GMT
I have just come back from an amazing weekend of London Theatre. I saw this on Friday night (8th April) and really liked it. Yes, the show is a little on the light-weight side, but I loved the ensemble nature of the piece, and the interwoven story lines.
I knew only the score beforehand, and to be honest, in theory this is everything I hate - a mixture of rap, hip hop, pop, salsa etc, but I absolutely loved it, and it is easily the best thing about the show! So catchy, but so well-written at the same time. A proper theatre score, developing character, and taking us from one point of the story to the other! Highlights were the opening number (probably the best opening song to a show I think there is), 'Blackout' (a stunning piece of music, combined with an excellent staging), and the Finale. However, the whole score is an absolute diamond.
The show was also amazingly performed with such energy and attack by the whole cast. The staging was excellent, and I loved being in such close proximity to the action.
However, I do have a few quibbles. Lily Frazer who plays Nina had/has pitch problems in her lower register (mostly being sharp), which took me out of the show on occasion. The high end of her voice was very good though, with no pitch problems evident. Also, as much as I love David Bedella, I don't think his role warrants an Olivier Award. Nothing against his performance, (which is very, very good), I just don't think the role is an award-winning one. If anything, Sam Mackay, deserved a nomination, as he is the one standout in this production.
Overall though, a fabulous show, with a solid four stars. It is just missing that little bit of magic that would have made this musical theatre heaven.
|
|
|
|
Post by d'James on Apr 14, 2016 18:48:00 GMT
Lots of understudies on tonight.
It's packed though. Lots of school groups!
|
|
12 posts
|
Post by darren on Apr 14, 2016 22:22:44 GMT
Yes lots of understudies tonight but I still enjoyed the show. Sat front row which was quite an experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by d'James on Apr 14, 2016 23:19:15 GMT
Yes I was front row last time. It's really fun but I think most seats would have a good view.
So we had Josie as Abuela, Jocasta as Camila, Michael Cortez as Uznavi, Sarah Naudi as Vanessa and Alexzandra Sarmiento as Carla.
I wonder, does anyone know if the new Abuela has started yet as she was meant to on the 10th according to the website.
I also wish the website had the understudy list on it so I could see who is 1st/2nd cover. (If it's there I can't find it and sadly my programme is elsewhere.)
Anyway, tonight's show: very busy, some school groups in; some well behaved, some less well behaved. It was a very good atmosphere.
I'm pleased I've seen Josie as Abuela - I just love her voice. I can confirm that the painting of the Abuela does not change. Also she didn't wear the scarf for whatever reason. I think she wore the same wig she wore as Camila just with an added grey streak.
Michael as Usnavi just doesn't have the same physical presence as Sam (I.e. He's just not as big) but he acted/rapped/sang it all really well.
Jocasta as Camila was really good, she looked great, but her voice was perhaps a bit young-sounding for 'Enough,' but she sang it really well.
Sarah was good as Vanessa. I saw Jocasta as her last time so it was interesting to compare.
Still love the show.
P.S. I took my Dad tonight (he loved it) and he should obviously be on the Olivier committee as he couldn't stop raving about David Bedella.
|
|
3,349 posts
|
Post by Dr Tom on Apr 18, 2016 21:28:14 GMT
Saw a few of the new cast yesterday evening.
Johnny Bishop was fine as Graffiti Pete. Think it was his second show. It's quite a minor part and everything seemed good. His moves were on form.
Christine Allado was there as Vanessa. Stunning voice and well-worth seeing. One funny line slip up when the word "sit" gained an extra "h".
Norma Atallah was on as Abuela. Quite a different take on the role, which was played more for laughs. Great voice when it mattered. No grey streak in the hair.
There was a new painting for Abuela which was a good likeness of Norma. A few small set changes as well.
The theatre was pretty full, but freezing. I heard someone saying that the heating had broken.
Several discussions nearby linking In The Heights to Hamilton, so that might be helping draw the crowds in.
As normal, there were a few covers on.
Gabriella Garcia was on as Nina and I enjoyed the innocence she brought to the role.
Vas Constanti was on as Kevin. I've seen him do that role several times and he really gives a powerful performance and does it justice.
And Michael Cortez was on as Piragua Guy. Much stronger with the accent than last time I saw him do the role.
A limited ensemble again. Neither of the new swings were on and Spin was missing too. But I've seen this performed more bare bones and somehow the cast always make this work.
Still my favourite of the modern shows running in London right now.
|
|
) what frustrates me is people who dismiss it entierly. There's plenty of supposedly 'great' works that I just don't get either-be boring if we all did. 
