"I have never spent much time thinking about the themes of my plays, as, I have noticed, when an audience begins to talk about the play’s theme, it means the plot was no good."
Saturday 17 October 2009
Quote for the Day
David Mamet in the NY Times (via Mr Stage Right at Big Hollywood):
The Jukebox Keeps Playing
Broadwayworld tells us that the Spice Girls' back catalogue is being lined up as the next big jukebox musical. Many will groan. But many more will go and see it.
It begs the question, how many more pop catalogues are there left that can be turned into commercially viable musicals? There has to be limiting factors. For starters there has to be a solid fan base, willing and able to make a trip to the theatre (so not too rock 'n' roll). Secondly, there needs to be enough material to make up an evening's entertainment. That means at least a dozen hit songs. By my reckoning that there are only a small number of potential jukebox musicals left:
Forever the Young One - the Cliff Richard musical
Hello, Yellow Brick Road - the Elton John musical
Desperately Seeking Something - the Madonna musical
When Irish Guys are Smiling - the Westlife musical
Retirement Plan - the Girls Aloud musical
I'd give 'em 5 more years. Tops.
It begs the question, how many more pop catalogues are there left that can be turned into commercially viable musicals? There has to be limiting factors. For starters there has to be a solid fan base, willing and able to make a trip to the theatre (so not too rock 'n' roll). Secondly, there needs to be enough material to make up an evening's entertainment. That means at least a dozen hit songs. By my reckoning that there are only a small number of potential jukebox musicals left:
Forever the Young One - the Cliff Richard musical
Hello, Yellow Brick Road - the Elton John musical
Desperately Seeking Something - the Madonna musical
When Irish Guys are Smiling - the Westlife musical
Retirement Plan - the Girls Aloud musical
I'd give 'em 5 more years. Tops.
Conceptions
Recently caught a show performed by the Guildford School of Acting. The show was Baby with a book by Sybille Pearson and songs by David Shire and Richard Maltby Jnr. It was first performed on Broadway in the 1980s. As the strory of three couples and their reactions to pregnancy, it was a small-scale, intimate show in an era of megamusicals. Lovely performances, sweet songs.
But one the most notable aspects of the show was coming out at the interval and not knowing what the ending would be. This doesn't happen often in musical theatre. Most succesful musicals are based on something else - a book, a play, a film, Argnetinian dictators' wives. There are exceptions (The Music Man, Company, A Chorus Line) but they are in the minority. Even the great Rodgers and Hammerstein only managed two musicals based on original ideas and they were two of their least succesful (Allegro and Me and Juliet).
Why should this be the case? Well, in commercial terms, having an already-established element may help with the advance sales. It's easier to sell Mathilda, the new Roald Dahl musical, than an entirely original musical. In practical terms, I'm sure it helps to have a focal point. Musicals are such a curious mix of competing elements and personalities, having an unchanging source material might help give a certain coherence.
But perhaps there's more to it. Perhaps there is something inherently difficult in conceiving ideas for musicals. Ideas often start small - a character sketch, a scene outline - and then get fleshed out. But musical ideas tend to require a certain size, of character, of emotion. In short, there needs to be a reason to sing. Maybe there is a discontinuity between the "smallness" of how ideas begin and the "bigness" required.
I admit this is all very vague. But along with the obvious commercial and practical considerations, it may explain why original idea musicals tend to come from smaller-scale shows. Shows like Baby are simply easier to conceive.
But one the most notable aspects of the show was coming out at the interval and not knowing what the ending would be. This doesn't happen often in musical theatre. Most succesful musicals are based on something else - a book, a play, a film, Argnetinian dictators' wives. There are exceptions (The Music Man, Company, A Chorus Line) but they are in the minority. Even the great Rodgers and Hammerstein only managed two musicals based on original ideas and they were two of their least succesful (Allegro and Me and Juliet).
Why should this be the case? Well, in commercial terms, having an already-established element may help with the advance sales. It's easier to sell Mathilda, the new Roald Dahl musical, than an entirely original musical. In practical terms, I'm sure it helps to have a focal point. Musicals are such a curious mix of competing elements and personalities, having an unchanging source material might help give a certain coherence.
But perhaps there's more to it. Perhaps there is something inherently difficult in conceiving ideas for musicals. Ideas often start small - a character sketch, a scene outline - and then get fleshed out. But musical ideas tend to require a certain size, of character, of emotion. In short, there needs to be a reason to sing. Maybe there is a discontinuity between the "smallness" of how ideas begin and the "bigness" required.
I admit this is all very vague. But along with the obvious commercial and practical considerations, it may explain why original idea musicals tend to come from smaller-scale shows. Shows like Baby are simply easier to conceive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)