"A lot of shows are star-driven. It’s because of the precarious nature of musicals now – it’s always down to the bottom line. They [producers] want insurance all the time. They want a big name to ensure a show will happen"
I'm sure he's right. Stars are, almost by definition, those who get top billing for protecting the bottom line.
"And there is so much money involved and invested that they don’t want to take chances anymore. In those days [the time of Les Miserables opening] there was more of a creative force behind a show, rather than guys in suits crunching numbers."
Quite. I've heard Russell Crowe sing and, man, can he crunch some numbers.
"Unfortunately, it dumbs down everybody. And it doesn’t do any favours to musicals or plays or creativity involved in the arts.”
The artistic complaint about the vulgarity of money is a common one. The complaint about using stars is more interesting.
Stars are a natural and necessary fact of commercial theatre. In fact, there are precious few genuine musical theatre stars here in the UK. As I've mentioned before, in order to become a bona fide musical star (as opposed to a star who does musicals) you need two things: (1) to be the original lead in an original musical and (2) to have a hit song from the show. Really, only Elaine Page, Sarah Brightman and the two Michaels (Ball and Crawford) fit the bill.
That is why we've had all those reality TV search-for-star Maria/Joseph/Jesus formats; there were no ready-made, off-the-shelf musical stars from which the producers could choose. So they had to create one. That's fine for one show but then there is the question of what happens next. After the initial production and the national tour and the limited-release album, what do these newly-crowned stars do with their stardom? I'm sure they could continue in revivals or do the rounds in the long-runners. But if they want to be bona fide musical stars, what they really, really need is an original hit show and an original hit song.
What they need are writers.
Whilst opportunity was knocking for those Marias/Josephs/Jesses, some wondered why Lord Andy couldn't knock up some similar opportunities for writers. Well, there's no shame in writing for a star. Indeed there are plenty of precedents: Gypsy, Funny Girl, Phantom, to name but a few. I'd have thought that writers would be lining up to provide material for these freshly-minted stars.
Maybe this is being done, maybe not. My point is that there's no intrinsic reason why a star-driven musical theatre should be an uncreative one. Stars need writers to help increase their stardom; writers need stars to get their work put on. It's a deal to be fostered, rather than Faust-ed.
No comments:
Post a Comment