Post by jackjackjack on May 20, 2004 3:25:08 GMT 11
When you’re lazy, you’ll find any way to save time, like writing two reviews in one, but I do have an excuse. When the season was first announced, MTC advertised Urinetown with a quote from a newspaper that said it was “better than The Producers”. At the time I wondered why anyone would compare the two. Even without knowing the plot of Urinetown, it is obvious that the two shows differ in tone remarkably. There are however, notable similarities. Both shows unashamedly go for laughs. Both shows are satirical in the sense that they mock the musical form while still following most of the established rules. Both have an anti-establishment theme. Okay I’m stretching it now. I’m not ignoring the obvious differences, which make comparisons a little shaky. On the contrary. I wish to point out a huge difference, in that Urinetown is a classy production of a clever, witty show, and The Producers... is not.
Let’s start with the score(s). Little Sally points out that the score of Urinetown belies it’s tone, which it does. Or does it? The tone of Urinetown is only dark in Act II. The only songs which have a suspect tone are perhaps Snuff That Girl and We’re Not Sorry. Either could easily have lyrics about a dance party laced through them without changing the music, but that comes from the energy in the conflict, and it’s honest. Now can someone please explain to me the tone of The King of Broadway from The Producers, where he’s so depressed about his show failing that he comes out of the theatre and does a song and dance number with bums and nuns. And where the hell did those nuns come from, was that supposed to be funny? The Producers also lacked any let up from the comedy, except when they were trying to be funny and failed. What musical, no matter how funny, has gone without a big dramatic theme? Maybe it was supposed to be in Til Him, but it wasn’t earned by developing the relationship throughout the piece. When the word friend was first used by Bloom, it didn’t even feel right. The score of Urinetown is far more enjoyable. The only criticism I have is that I got Chitty Chitty Bang Bang stuck in my head the other day, and I couldn’t work out where it came from, until I realised the similarities to the verse of the Cop Song. (Two slow beats followed by six quick. Then six quick followed by two slow.) Oh well, nobody’s perfect.
Both musicals gave nods to the classics, Urinetown used it’s choreography to recall subtle but recognizable moments from theatrical classics such as West Side Story and Les Mis, The Producers used a cheap joke to recall the most manufactured musical in history (more so than Mamma Mia), Singing in the Rain.
Both musicals cast quality performers in all roles. Urinetown allowed them to find their own footing, resulting in 14 world class performances, only Gerry Connolly seemed a little out of his depth, hesitating noticeably on many lines, both musical and otherwise. The other character that bugged me was Hot Blades Harry, but I don’t know whether to blame that on the actor, the director or the writer. In The Producers, Bert Newton stood out as outstanding. Tony Sheldon, Grant Piro and Chloe Dallimore were all wonderful. I look forward to seeing them in roles with at least a little bit of depth. Reg Livermore and Tom Burlinson have such great reputations, I’d like to blame their performances on the direction, which has reportedly been obsessed with mimicking the American production. I could have sworn I heard Nathan Lane’s voice in Reg’s at one early stage, and I wondered why Tom sounded kinda like Martin Short, until I realised that he was playing the L.A. Production right around the time that Tom was miscast. He clearly doesn’t have enough comedian in him to pull off a tantrum.
Urinetown was constantly surprising me with its humour, its choreography and its plot. The Producers surprised me exactly once, mostly because the self referential humour (re intermission etc) seemed so out of place. Most of the time I laughed at the jokes, I was laughing before the punchlines, they were THAT predictable.
Now most of the accusations I’m throwing at The Producers you could easily aim at... say, We Will Rock You, but WWRY got away with it. It always remained true to what it was. It seems from when I emerged from the Princess that mine wasn’t the popular opinion, but I stand by it. Bring on Hairspray. I think.
Let’s start with the score(s). Little Sally points out that the score of Urinetown belies it’s tone, which it does. Or does it? The tone of Urinetown is only dark in Act II. The only songs which have a suspect tone are perhaps Snuff That Girl and We’re Not Sorry. Either could easily have lyrics about a dance party laced through them without changing the music, but that comes from the energy in the conflict, and it’s honest. Now can someone please explain to me the tone of The King of Broadway from The Producers, where he’s so depressed about his show failing that he comes out of the theatre and does a song and dance number with bums and nuns. And where the hell did those nuns come from, was that supposed to be funny? The Producers also lacked any let up from the comedy, except when they were trying to be funny and failed. What musical, no matter how funny, has gone without a big dramatic theme? Maybe it was supposed to be in Til Him, but it wasn’t earned by developing the relationship throughout the piece. When the word friend was first used by Bloom, it didn’t even feel right. The score of Urinetown is far more enjoyable. The only criticism I have is that I got Chitty Chitty Bang Bang stuck in my head the other day, and I couldn’t work out where it came from, until I realised the similarities to the verse of the Cop Song. (Two slow beats followed by six quick. Then six quick followed by two slow.) Oh well, nobody’s perfect.
Both musicals gave nods to the classics, Urinetown used it’s choreography to recall subtle but recognizable moments from theatrical classics such as West Side Story and Les Mis, The Producers used a cheap joke to recall the most manufactured musical in history (more so than Mamma Mia), Singing in the Rain.
Both musicals cast quality performers in all roles. Urinetown allowed them to find their own footing, resulting in 14 world class performances, only Gerry Connolly seemed a little out of his depth, hesitating noticeably on many lines, both musical and otherwise. The other character that bugged me was Hot Blades Harry, but I don’t know whether to blame that on the actor, the director or the writer. In The Producers, Bert Newton stood out as outstanding. Tony Sheldon, Grant Piro and Chloe Dallimore were all wonderful. I look forward to seeing them in roles with at least a little bit of depth. Reg Livermore and Tom Burlinson have such great reputations, I’d like to blame their performances on the direction, which has reportedly been obsessed with mimicking the American production. I could have sworn I heard Nathan Lane’s voice in Reg’s at one early stage, and I wondered why Tom sounded kinda like Martin Short, until I realised that he was playing the L.A. Production right around the time that Tom was miscast. He clearly doesn’t have enough comedian in him to pull off a tantrum.
Urinetown was constantly surprising me with its humour, its choreography and its plot. The Producers surprised me exactly once, mostly because the self referential humour (re intermission etc) seemed so out of place. Most of the time I laughed at the jokes, I was laughing before the punchlines, they were THAT predictable.
Now most of the accusations I’m throwing at The Producers you could easily aim at... say, We Will Rock You, but WWRY got away with it. It always remained true to what it was. It seems from when I emerged from the Princess that mine wasn’t the popular opinion, but I stand by it. Bring on Hairspray. I think.
