lhmusicals

=Musicals- Success and Failure=

Using as source material the videos linked to the wiki schedule page illustrating musical theater, the DVD seen in class covering the development and making of Taboo, Caroline, or Change, Wicked, and Avenue Q, as well as The Fantasticks, speculate on aspects of the shows presented that appear to have led to their success and/or failure in the periods in which they were developed. In other words, why have some shows succeeded while others have failed, during the period when they were created?

Firstly, proper casting is an extremely important consideration in musical theater. This form of theater involves the most variety of talent in that most, if not all characters must be able to act, sing, and dance—not an easy trifecta to master. At times, a character may not even best played by an actor who does not sing with stringent technical skill, but with a certain attitude or sound that best fits the part. A cast with the perfect balance of skill and the right “vibe” could make or break a performance. In // Contact //, Susan Stroman already had a certain type of woman in mind for the part of the woman in the yellow dress. When she saw this persona in Jena Malone, she was forced to reserve judgment until she had seen a demonstration of her ability in the art of dance. This is a common occurrence in the world of musical theater and, in order for a musical to be successful, all of the key elements and skills must be present.

As far as set and costumes concerned, they also make great contributions to the level of achievement of a musical. If either is too over-the-top, it can be distracting and detract from the character development and overall experience. Additionally, as in // The Lion King //, if a set requires that an audience use their imagination, they become more invested in the show. As Thomas Schumacher said, this involvement causes the audience to join the producers, directors, and cast in the journey of the musical, which, in itself, improves the experience. Creative and elaborate sets and costumes display to the audience the money that they spent on their admission. This helps to reinforce their appreciation of the show and the feeling that it was worth their time and money.

The substance, being the music and book, of a musical is crucial to its success. It is only logical that this core material could be the downfall or acclaim of a musical. The book could very well have been the downfall of //Caroline, or Change// as it lacked development. Without depth of plot and other important aspects of the story itself, a musical cannot reach very far. On the other end of the spectrum, if a musical contains memorable songs and the music is appealing, spectators are likely to seek out soundtracks and other forms of the music later, bringing more attention to the musical and continuing its success. Key examples of these successful musicals that owe a great deal of their success to music are //Wicked, The Lion King//, and //RENT//. Some people only go to see shows on Broadway for the musical aspect; they see the other aspects as secondary, chiefly desiring to see some of their favorite songs performed live. I personally enjoy the music of // RENT // so much that I could watch the show several times in a row and not grow tired of it. The power of music is subjective, though, and must fit the piece. Variety of tunes, harmonies, and compositions along with fidelity to the subject of the musical are important in keeping audiences’ attention and approval.

Probably the most important aspect in musical theater, which can lead to the success of a show or, conversely, the failure is its accessibility to the public and whether or not it relates to current issues. Whether the issues addressed in a show are political or social, audiences need to feel connected to a show before its success is a possibility. For example, one of the early hits, //Oklahoma!//, opened during wartime in America. The setting and subject matter of this musical induced nostalgia for traditional American values, which drew Americans in. //The Fantasticks// partly owes its success to the somewhat timeless ideas of young love and the loss of innocence, which branch the generational gap. Unless a show incites, endears, appalls, motivates, brings joy to, or otherwise affects an audience, they will not feel as drawn in to the performance. Without this link, a musical is not memorable and the public will not rave about or condemn it publicly; it will merely fade into the background. They say that any publicity is good publicity. In this instance, this adage is true because, unless people talk about a musical and peak others’ interest, the audience numbers will quickly dwindle and the show will fail.

I had previously thought that originality was imperative to the success of a show, but am beginning to see that this aspect is not as important as I once thought. With the increasing number of pieces that were created merely for their shock value, I think that the public is becoming jaded to this style and is increasingly abandoning it for more traditional pieces. //Taboo// and //Avenue Q// are two examples of musicals that made a splash in New York, but did not last for very long. This could very well be due to the fact that audiences are rejecting the more shocking, scandalous musicals. The classics certainly still have their place as we see in // West Side Story // and // My Fair Lady // as they contain definite elements of Shakespeare’s // Romeo and Juliet //. I predict that there will be a surge in musicals that recall past successes and contain familiar elements. What makes these shows unique is the atmosphere and perspective with which the director develops the story. Adding new elements such as a change in setting, different theatrics, new plot twists, or fresh character attitudes would give such shows just the right amount of novelty without putting off audiences with too many appalling or scandalous elements.