Ivo van Hove & Anne Teresa De Keersmaeker Take On West Side Story for Broadway

[On Pointe]

To be fair,  you shouldn't judge an evening length work from short excerpts,  but having watched the 60 Minutes report,  the Van Hove production of WSS appears to be so determinedly wrongminded it just might work.  It will be one of those shows that Broadway regulars will brag about having seen,  but it looks unpleasant and uninspiring.  I was struck by how on the beat,  how "European" the choreography seemed,  even when there were attempts at incorporating elements of street dance.  Bill Whitaker described the cast as "looking like America now",  but nowhere in America at any time have black kids joined in with white kids to fight Latinos.  It's ludicrous.  On a journalistic note,  they mistakenly used Peter Gennaro's choreography for the America number to try to make a point about how "dated" Jerome Robbins' work is,  which was a punk move in the first place.  Denigrating the original does not enhance the current production.

This WSS will sell tickets and has already made back a chunk of its investment.  But I doubt that subsequent productions will be influenced by it.  It's too tech heavy and grim.

[sandik]

I didn't dislike the movement I could see in the 60 Minutes report, but I didn't feel I could judge the overall staging from the snippets we could see.  I'm not a huge fan of multi-screen productions, but I imagine there are plenty of folks who are.  In most stagings of the musical I've seen, they've had a difficult time "placing" Maria's bedroom -- the remote camera might make a good job of it here, when they get the technical stuff worked out. 

I can't say I was impressed with the depth of the interviews.  Honestly, the show didn't seem to be in bad shape overall for that point in the process, but the interviewer (I apologize -- I cannot right now remember his name) seemed pretty clue-free about how Broadway shows come together.

[On Pointe]

The reporter was Bill Whitaker,  and I'm sure he knows how Broadway shows are produced.  But assuming ignorance is a technique often used by television journalists,  because they try to ask the kinds of questions that viewers who may know nothing about the subject might ask.  That said,  this was a puff piece,  not a review, more public relations than actual reporting.

[abatt]

I saw the production a few weeks ago and disliked it.  I hated the fact that many of the scenes took place in the extreme back of the stage in the box set, so that the only way you could see what was happening was to look at a video projection.  I had no idea that the bedroom scene was in a completely different part of the theater until I saw the 60 Minutes piece.  What's the point of going to live theater if most of the important scenes are played in places where the audience can only observe it on a video? I saw it when Tony was still out with an injury, but I didn't think the acting was particularly convincing.   It will be interesting to see what the critics think. 

 

[sandik]

12 hours ago, On Pointe said:

The reporter was Bill Whitaker,  and I'm sure he knows how Broadway shows are produced.  But assuming ignorance is a technique often used by television journalists,  because they try to ask the kinds of questions that viewers who may know nothing about the subject might ask. 

Oh, I know that -- I just get so frustrated when general readership (viewership?) programs reinforce that assumption that the audience is totally clue-free and can't appreciate more complex understanding. 

6 hours ago, abatt said:

I saw the production a few weeks ago and disliked it.  I hated the fact that many of the scenes took place in the extreme back of the stage in the box set, so that the only way you could see what was happening was to look at a video projection. ... What's the point of going to live theater if most of the important scenes are played in places where the audience can only observe it on a video?

It's certainly not a traditional theatrical presentation, but it is still a live performance with all the possibilities that includes (both thrilling and ridiculous).  We see all kinds of approaches to heritage works in the theater (I've been dipping in and out of Eric Idle's production of Gilbert and Sullivan's Mikado, set in a 1930s seaside resort), and while some of them sit far away from the original work, and some of them may confound or frustrate us, they are legitimate ways to explore the material.  We still see stagings of WWS that reproduce as much of the original production as possible -- I think it's ok to try something else as well.

[On Pointe]

Jerome Robbins experimented with combining live dancers with film projection in his ballet I'm Oldfashioned,  which featured Rita Hayworth and Fred Astaire.  The live dancing couldn't compete,  because the film images were so overwhelming in size,  but mostly because it was Rita Hayworth and Fred Astaire for God's sake.  Nobody on stage could come close to their style,  technique,  and charisma.

In that 60 Minutes piece which revealed that Maria's bedroom was actually a dressing room converted to a video studio on the fourth floor,  I wondered what would happen if she tripped running up the stairs and missed her cue?   She should be in great shape by the end of the run.  I also wondered if it was really necessary for all the gang members to be shirtless in the rain during the rumble?  Nice eye candy,  but not typical gang behavior.

[sandik]

44 minutes ago, On Pointe said:

The live dancing couldn't compete,  because the film images were so overwhelming in size,  but mostly because it was Rita Hayworth and Fred Astaire for God's sake.

...

In that 60 Minutes piece which revealed that Maria's bedroom was actually a dressing room converted to a video studio on the fourth floor,  I wondered what would happen if she tripped running up the stairs and missed her cue?  

Twyla Tharp made Bad Smells in 1984, which was a fairly violent work that included a live videographer -- he walked among the dancers and shot what they were doing and it was projected onto the back scrim, so that you saw very small details in very large scale.  There was one sequence where a man pulled a woman's head back by her hair -- you could see her scalp lift slightly off her skull as he tightened his grip.

Yes, it was pretty grim.  (it premiered on the same bill as Nine Sinatra Songs, which made for a very interesting program)

It did seem like the secret room that they repurposed for Maria's bedroom in the new production of WSS was pretty removed from the stage, but I've seen plenty of folks trip and fall just stepping over a tapeline.  One of the reasons we value live theater, as much as it makes us twinge, is the small possibility of disaster.

[nanushka]

12 minutes ago, sandik said:

Twyla Tharp made Bad Smells in 1984...

Oh my I'm just giggling at the very fact of a piece named Bad Smells. Love it.

13 minutes ago, sandik said:

One of the reasons we value live theater, as much as it makes us twinge, is the small possibility of disaster.

How perfectly expressed.

[canbelto]

I;m going tomorrow with my mom. I bought rear mezzanine seats because I heard you can actually see the whole stage and set better. I hope i like it.

[cubanmiamiboy]

18 hours ago, On Pointe said:

Jerome Robbins experimented with combining live dancers with film projection in his ballet I'm Oldfashioned,  which featured Rita Hayworth and Fred Astaire.  The live dancing couldn't compete,  because the film images were so overwhelming in size,  but mostly because it was Rita Hayworth and Fred Astaire for God's sake.  Nobody on stage could come close to their style,  technique,  and charisma.

I'm fresh from having just seen this in Miami, and it is true. Although I might add that , besides the obvious knowledge Hayworth and Astaire had on social dancing, ballroom style, AND the fact that there was an unmatched charm based on the real class and elegance these two had in real life, the ballerinas onstage are in pointes vs Rita's dancing heels, so the movements had to be adapted to the different medium. But I definitely agree....the little nuances, elegant quickness and unique accents on them two on the screen were quite hard to stand up to by the live dancers.

Edited February 19, 2020 by cubanmiamiboy

[canbelto]

I went tonight with my mother. We were both very disappointed.

https://humbledandoverwhelmed.blogspot.com/2020/02/west-side-story-total-momsical-failure.html

[BalanchineFan]

On 1/9/2020 at 2:18 PM, California said:

Could you elaborate on how water is being used? I can recall seeing photos of Mariinsky students with watering cans sprinkling water on classroom floors, with the explanation that they needed to get used to such things. Is that what's going on?

It rains onstage during The Rumble and during Somewhere. The dancers in the Rumble probably take their shirts off because it's easier to deal with rain on skin than wet clothing. Plus the guys look super hot.

[BalanchineFan]

On 2/18/2020 at 3:23 AM, On Pointe said:

The reporter was Bill Whitaker,  and I'm sure he knows how Broadway shows are produced.  But assuming ignorance is a technique often used by television journalists,  because they try to ask the kinds of questions that viewers who may know nothing about the subject might ask.  That said,  this was a puff piece,  not a review, more public relations than actual reporting.

Sorry I missed the 60 minutes segment. As a point of general info: Official news outlets can't review any show, or post reviews until after opening night. That's the journalistic agreement, and what an opening is for. Pre-opening all you get are puff pieces, "This is what's coming to Broadway!'

[nanushka]

3 minutes ago, BalanchineFan said:

Sorry I missed the 60 minutes segment. As a point of general info: Official news outlets can't review any show, or post reviews until after opening night. That's the journalistic agreement, and what an opening is for. Pre-opening all you get are puff pieces, "This is what's coming to Broadway!'

Presumably there's a mode of informed and informative interviewing/reporting that would not constitute a review but that would still be something more substantive than a puff piece, no?

[BalanchineFan]

16 minutes ago, nanushka said:

Presumably there's a mode of informed and informative interviewing/reporting that would not constitute a review but that would still be something more substantive than a puff piece, no?

Sure, call it what you like. I don't say puff piece to denigrate the reporting, I say it as a binary opposite to a review. There is no journalistic attempt to evaluate the results, just to report on the creation of the piece and promote the project.

[abatt]

With this kind of review Ramasar might be back at NYCB a lot sooner than anticipated.  I thought the review was spot on.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/20/theater/west-side-story-review-sharks-vs-jets-vs-video.htmI

I also saw a review from the WP, which gave the show a much more positive review.

Edited February 21, 2020 by abatt

[Helene]

It depends on who the core audience is.  Whether or not the production was meant as a comment on increasingly limited attention spans, it might hit the spot, especially with tourist audiences who might already be trying to cram a ton into a short period of time and are in that mindset already.

[California]

25 minutes ago, abatt said:

With this kind of review Ramasar might be back at NYCB a lot sooner than anticipated.  I thought the review was spot on.

 

Does he even have that option? Didn't the union-negotiated resolution guarantee him just one more year at NYCB? That might be gone. 

[nanushka]

3 minutes ago, Helene said:

It depends on who the core audience is.  Whether or not the production was meant as a comment on increasingly limited attention spans, it might hit the spot, especially with tourist audiences who might already be trying to cram a ton into a short period of time and are in that mindset already.

Yeah, I'm not at all convinced that the show is going to be a dud, however much discerning audiences familiar with the original may be turned off. Younger and/or less theater-savvy audiences aren't going to care that Robbins' choreography is gone; many may find the racial dynamics (however illogical when considered from a historical or socio-cultural perspective) to be refreshing or interesting; the screens may play much differently to millennials (many of whom find anything tech-enhanced to be inherently more appealing). Throw in some hot wet beefcake and it might just keep bringing in sizable audiences for at least awhile.

That said, I haven't seen it, so I'm really just guessing at possibilities.

[dirac]

3 hours ago, abatt said:

With this kind of review Ramasar might be back at NYCB a lot sooner than anticipated.  I thought the review was spot on.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/20/theater/west-side-story-review-sharks-vs-jets-vs-video.htmI

I also saw a review from the WP, which gave the show a much more positive review.

The other reviews I've seen have been overall more positive than Brantley's and kinder to Ramasar.

[nanushka]

5 minutes ago, dirac said:

The other reviews I've seen have been overall more positive than Brantley's and kinder to Ramasar.

Alexandra Schwartz in The New Yorker is tough on Ramasar, though (and tough on the production as a whole):

Quote

The Puerto Rican Sharks are played by Latino actors, which is a relief; we are far from the miserable days of brownface. (Yesenia Ayala, who moves like a knife across the stage, is a highlight as Anita; Ramasar, leaning heavily on a gluey “Spanish” accent, is the weak link.)

 

[dirac]

I saw that one. If a critic isn't going to like you, I'd say "weak link" is getting off pretty easy.

[On Pointe]

I wonder if the New Yorker critic is aware that Amar Ramasar is one of the few performers in WSS who is actually Puerto Rican?   I guess the Indian name threw her.  Somehow I think a Puerto Rican who grew up among Puerto Ricans might have a better handle on a realistic "Spanish" accent than Ms. Schwartz.

[abatt]

1 hour ago, On Pointe said:

I wonder if the New Yorker critic is aware that Amar Ramasar is one of the few performers in WSS who is actually Puerto Rican?   I guess the Indian name threw her.  Somehow I think a Puerto Rican who grew up among Puerto Ricans might have a better handle on a realistic "Spanish" accent than Ms. Schwartz.

I was thinking the exact same thing.

[On Pointe]

I must say that it annoys me when critics write about how relieved they are that we are "far from the miserable days of brown face" without any context or consideration of why performers were in brown face to begin with.  There were few opportunities for Latinos in musical theatre in the 1950s,  and those with the extensive ballet training Robbins demanded were very rare,  Chita Rivera being the exception that proves the rule.  Lin-Manuel Miranda has often spoken of how he became a composer because he loved musical theatre and wanted to be a part of it,  but he was keenly aware that if he wanted decent three-dimensional roles,  he would have to write them himself.  And as much as he loved WSS,  the portrayal of young Puerto Ricans as knife-wielding gang members was painful,  especially because it was for many decades the only image of Puerto Ricans on Broadway.  Nobody in theatre thought that brown face was "miserable" when WSS debuted.  It was just the way things were.