Robber Bridegroom a perplexing choice for a New York revival (review)

Posted: 5/10/16 at 11:53pm

I'm just going to flat out say it.....The Robber Bridegroom is not an especially well written musical. I understand it has Broadway roots from the 1970s as well as being one of the first produced works from much celebrated writer Alfred Uhry and of course there's the members of the cast that went on to become performing legends, but after seeing the Roundabout's revival of the show earlier tonight,  it made wonder why Artistic Director Todd Haimes and Director Alex Timbers choose this show to reexamine on a New York Stage.

The dialogue is painfully old fashioned and just flat out not funny as the lyrics give the show a stagnant quality. This, combined with the paper thin story,  cause the show to spin in its tracks for 90 minutes.  The music by Robert Waldman fares better, but it is pastiche at best. Rarely does it cause the audience to feel any kind of emotion.  New York Audiences are just too sophisticated for this kind of material in 2016.

To give this show a compliment right of the bat, however, I will say that the orchestrations by Justin Levine and Martin Lowe are fantastic! They give the pastiche score a modern Mumford and Sons/Lumineers/Bon Iver folk rock vibe.  The band sounds absolutely fabulous playing it. Costuming them in hipster lumbersexual garb was a great touch from Emily Rebholz (of course she makes sure they all have trendy beards and mustaches to match). The band is the star of the show here.

Alex Timbers is a confusing director. In shows like Peter and Starcatchers and Here Lies Love he demonstrates that he understands what good theater is (much better shows than Robber), but if the material isn't as strong his ideas fall flatter than a pancake on a kitchen floor. His humor is all pulled from pop culture references and his tricks seemingly from watching too many episodes of The Loney Tunes when he was kid. With Robber Bridegroom, his tongue cemented firmly in his cheek staging seems amatuer. He really needs to stuff more tricks up his sleeves if he wants to keep up with other more sophisticated directors. Don't get me wrong, I like that he can make cheap look intentional and necessary, but his Robber Bridegroom just doesn't come off professional.  One thing that might help is to work with other designers. 

Donyale Werle did a great job with PATSC, but the rest of her Scenic Design is starting to feel like she is just recreating family member's attic space. And for some reason she doesn't like to give dancers much space to move.  It actually gets in the way of Conner Gallagher's choreography this time giving it a holding back or stifled energy. The cast seems cramped. It also could be a bit more original than a square dance at times.

Steven Pasquale as Jamie Lockhart sings beautifully, but is miscast here in my opinion. He just isn't a funny actor. He's very funny in interviews, but he doesn't know how to create a comedy moment on stage...there is a major difference. Of course he's a handsome guy, but this role needs a combination of booth looks and comedic chops. It's no wonder Kevin Kline originated the role. I feel terrible for Leslie Kritzer as Salome. We all know she is a great musical comedy talent. She is doing everything in her power to make the just plain bad and unfunny writing work, but it just doesn't.  Alex seems like he got lost in trying to edit her performance, because she is literally throwing everything and the props trying to make something out of Salome. It's honestly hard to watch someone so good try so hard to please. Ahna O'Reilly as Rosamund sings pretty and of course is directed to be cheesey and hollow acting...one of Alex's tricks (it's not really funny). The rest of the cast is winning as an ensemble (Alex always does a great job at doing that). They make all the sound effects, change the set, act as set pieces....they are "the good theater" of the production.

The best two numbers are the back to back  Nothing's Up and Deeper in the Woods where Rosamund gets lost in the woods picking herbs and meets the Robber. Gorgeous orchestrations and theatrical blocking.

Overall, it's the material that is just not as good as the creative team and talent and it's dragging all of them down.

 

[ChiTheaterFan]

Posted: 5/10/16 at 11:58pm

I disagree completely as I adored this show. I thought it was hilarious and a ton of fun, and I loved Pasquale in it. I grinned from ear to ear the whole time. To each his own!

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/11/16 at 8:24am

 

Love this show.

 

[little_sally]

Posted: 5/11/16 at 9:41am

I disagree. I loved this production.

[Kad]

Posted: 5/11/16 at 10:05am

I thought this was a great, fun production- and one of the sadly rare occasions Kritzer has a very prominent role that lets her show off her considerable comedic talents.

[newintown]

Posted: 5/11/16 at 10:07am

1) This production has a significantly revised book, and all-new arrangements, which are, as pointed out, more hipster than authentic bluegrass. The original score/arrangements were in no way "pastiche" (a word that I would advise most people to delete from their vocabulary, as it's reductive and stupid).

2) In the late 70s/early 80s, it was done in regional and semi-professional theatres everywhere across the country, with great success. The show, as originally written, has been proven to work, whether one individual appreciates it or not.

3) "The dialogue is painfully old fashioned" is one of those meaningless and unhelpful phrases that don't convey any real particular idea. What exactly IS "old fashioned dialogue?"

4) "Rarely does it cause the audience to feel any kind of emotion." By which, of course, you mean that you didn't feel any emotion. Never attempt to speak for the entire audience; speaking just for yourself is perfectly fine.

5) "New York Audiences are just too sophisticated for this kind of material in 2016." If New York audiences embrace mindless works like Cats, Phantom, Mamma Mia, etc., then they are definitely not "too sophisticated" for anything.

6) "amatuer" is spelled "amateur."

7) "I feel terrible for Leslie Kritzer as Salome. We all know she is a great musical comedy talent. She is doing everything in her power to make the just plain bad and unfunny writing work, but it just doesn't." Actually, funny as Kritzer is, I think she would be funnier if she relied more upon the text, rather than relying upon extraneous bits of business like rolling over men in the audience and losing her lyrics.

Updated On: 5/11/16 at 10:07 AM

[mamaleh]

Posted: 5/11/16 at 10:10am

Count me in as another grinner from ear to ear.  Loved this show enough to have seen it multiple times.

[macnyc]

Posted: 5/11/16 at 10:22am

Are you sure you have a sense of humor in there somewhere? How can you not love a show that features a talking head in a box?

 

I am a huge fan of this production and, like Mamaleh, have seen it multiple times, bringing friends along. I think it is hilarious. I don't know when you attended, but every time I have been in the theater, the audience is enjoying every minute. The score is very strong too, with my favorites being Steal With Style, Rosamund's Dream, Nothin' Up, Love Stolen, Goodbye Salome,  and Sleepy Man. 

 

I'm glad that both Steven Pasquale and Leslie Kritzer won Lucille Lortel awards for their portrayals, but the entire cast is spot-on. I was not actually a fan of Peter and the Starcatcher, but I think Timbers has upped his game with this one. He keeps things moving at a breakneck clip and provides for many silly moments (the mirror with Goat on the other side, for instance). Maybe you have to be a fan of this type of humor, which borders on slapstick, but I happen to love it. One of my favorite shows of the season!

 

Updated On: 5/11/16 at 10:22 AM

Posted: 5/11/16 at 1:48pm

Newintown,

Thanks for responding to my review. If you really disagree with my thoughts, I'd ask you to write an intelligent response citing the reasons you feel so. I'd love to read that post.

1)I don't believe pastiche is reductive or stupid.  I think it's an epidemic in the musical theater writing world that has really held back an important art form. It is not composing, it is essentially plagiarizing a sound someone else created. One thing the theater needs a lot more of is unique voices, especially at a time when tourists who don't really want to be challenged by theater control more than half of what we get to see on the Broadway boards. Producers have been pandering to them for years and its frustrating to those of us who came here to work on or see theater that changes the way we think or see or feel.

2) Robber Bridegroom played on Broadway for 172 performances between two productions in '75 and '76. It went on a tour for one year between the two. It has never been considered a good example of classic musical theater and is much more famous for being an early example of Uhry's work and being the start of Kline's and Lupone's careers.

3) The old fashioned dialogue has out of date humor, a paper thin story with stereotypes not people, lyrics that don't resonate with audiences now (the pricklepear bloom?), an audience address structure that is uninteresting.  Then again, it's clear that the writers intent was for fun alone, not underlying meaning.

4) The theater was a little less than 50% full. Unfortunately for the the cast, the audience was not really plugged into the show, so that could account for the cast energy being low and not translating the material to us the way they would had the house been full and having more people's energy to feed off of. It was a quiet audience as well, that affects actors performances. It certainly did when I saw it. It just failed to move us.

5) When you say New York audiences and Tourist audiences you are saying two completely different things. I think its safe to say that almost every show that is performed at the Laura Pels Theater is going to be mainly New York audiences.  They are the theater goers that frequent shows there and they are far too sophisticated for Robber Bridegroom that has not been a hit for Roundabout this season. Tourists rarely venture Off-Broadway these days.  Cats became famous in the early 1980's because of the family friend nature of it. It was actually brought here to help be part of the clean up of Times Square.  There wasn't much Broadway Theater at all when Cats premiered. The revival is strictly trying to capture tourist's interest. Real New York Theater goers are not going to keep this revival running. Mamma Mia was created in the early 2000's, long after New York audiences stopped being the base. It was never intended for New York Audiences. It always had tourists in mind. The foreign market is what kept that show open for years.

6) making fun of the spelling of one word in an otherwise thoughtful observation of a show is trolling and beneath anyone on this chat board. We are here to write our thoughts good, bad and indifferent. I want to hear all of the above as long as its written by people that care and love the theater.

7) You didn't copy my whole quote, but I think we are agreeing about Leslie Kritzer. I'm saying she is doing way too much up there to please us. She is better than that and its clear you and I have seen her enough to know that.

thanks again for commenting.

[newintown]

Posted: 5/11/16 at 2:03pm

Every point you make (except for simple #7) is ridiculous and nonsensical.

1) Derogatory use of the word "pastiche" is reductive and stupid; every musician and composer I know cringes when they hear it used thus, because it means that a musical illiterate is trying to sound smart (generally at the expense of someone who actually knows how to create music). Form is form; not every tango is a pastiche of Weill or Piazzolla; not every song with a back beat is a pastiche of Brill Building writers. The score for The Robber Bridegroom is theatrical bluegrass, imitating nothing, merely using form.

2) I specifically wrote about the post-Broadway life of the show; discussing the Broadway runs is just non sequitur.

3) You haven't answered anything here; what IS "out of date humor," "a paper thin story," "an audience address structure that is uninteresting?" These are subjective (and still meaningless) opinions, not universal facts about theatre writing.

4) You're still trying to speak for an entire audience, when you have no idea what they thought of the show, no matter how loud or quiet you may have perceived them to be. Again, speak for yourself, not for strangers.

5) Oh, who cares about the rest. I certainly am tired of this.

[haterobics]

Posted: 5/11/16 at 2:06pm

"Robber Bridegroom played on Broadway for 172 performances between two productions in '75 and '76." and "The theater was a little less than 50% full." seem to have little to do with the show's quality, only that it was not a hit, then or now, seemingly to shore up support for your dismissal of it, no?

Posted: 5/11/16 at 2:16pm

Not at all, I'm not trying to dismiss it for the sake of dismissal, those are facts. And I just find it a perplexing idea for a revival being that it isn't really considered a good show.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 5/11/16 at 7:56pm

I am with the majority here. Enjoyed it the first time around when I saw the original production & thoroughly enjoyed this production.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 5/11/16 at 8:49pm

I always thought pastiche implied something fairly specific.  Follies, a score for which the term is constantly used (by the composer, no less) uses pastiche of specific songs and composers.  Merely having a blue-grass tinged score does not make it pastiche.

God I'm so tired of this whole "tourist audience" "New York audience" crap.  I suppose if one must, it would be more fair to divide it between "regular theatre goers" and "casual theatre goers".