Diane Paulus and new musicals....

[BroadwayBen]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 2:45pm

I would be interested in everyone's thoughts on Diane Paulus as the director of new musicals.  She's done three in the last year: Finding Neverland, Invisible thread, and Waitress.  My experience of all of them was that the dramaturgy was clunky and that her direction was unfocused, and often broad.  I still don't understand in Waitress why the band members come on and off, and then leave the bandstand and get coffee in the diner.  Am I alone in this?  I loved her Pippin, and I thought Porgy was just fine.   Does she get thrown by new work?  

[JBroadway]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 2:55pm

Interesting thought. I enjoyed her 3 recent revivals a lot. I enjoyed the recent new shows too, but I agree that the direction wasn't as good as in her revivals.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 2:57pm

I also think there's a strange dissonance between the quality of her revivals and the quality of her productions of new shows. Finding Neverland and Waitress both felt strangely flat and static to me. 

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 2:58pm

I've actually had this conversation many times with theatre friends. I hate to sound limiting, but I honestly wish she would stick to revivals. Pippin and Hair are some of the greatest things I've ever seen. She has a magical touch with revival work.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 3:05pm

Is it necessarily her direction at fault? The three examples of new musicals you chose are all from people new to creating musicals. It would be interesting to see, for example, how she would direct a new Ahrens and Flaherty show. 

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 3:36pm

She's not the only theatre director who doesn't have a great track record when it comes to new works (John Doyle and Bartlett Sher also come to mind). If we ever get to see her tackle a revival again, which show should she do?

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 3:48pm

I think Vintage has it right. This is more about "you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear" than anything else. Most new musicals are not very good.

[BroadwayNYC2]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 3:51pm

Most new musicals are not very good.

Oh please

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 4:45pm

well they aren't. most of anything new is not very good. Whereas most revivals are good because we don't revive the overwhelming majority of shows and the ones we do revive are the good ones. Do you seriously think Finding Neverland or Waitress is going to be revived in 25 years?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 4:56pm

It's harder to direct a new musical than to reimagine an old one.

Much, MUCH harder.

[Jarethan]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 5:45pm

PalJoey said: "It's harder to direct a new musical than to reimagine an old one.

Much, MUCH harder.

Especially if the material one has to work with is not as good.  I enjoyed both Neverland and Waitress, but as already stated, they are not likely to be revived I  2( years.

"

 

Posted: 5/24/16 at 7:10pm

Diane is not a bad director, we know that because of her revivals of Hair and Pippin. She just isn't a dramaturge so that makes developing new musicals harder for her.  Bart Sher is on record as saying he doesn't like to be anywhere near the writers room because of how hard it is.

HogansHero is right, most new musicals are not that great...watch clips of George C. Wolfe and Maury Yeston talk about how hateful the musical form can be. Yeston compares starting to write a musical like starting to take a voyage across an ocean when you already know the ship has a leak, lol. How many musicals do you hear about that never make it here....

I know a bit about about what happened during The Invisible Thread (major problems between Diane and the Writers), but also that show had almost no form. They didn't set anything up for the audience...have way through the show I had no idea what I was watching and why I was watching it. Besides some interesting music none of the songs had a journey we could follow and learn something new from. This unfortunately is an example of a bad show.

Finding Neverland again was just all spearheaded by Weinstein and not by anyone who was actually passionate about telling that story. It's clear that that was just a paying gig for most people who worked on it.  The elements do not gel together at all...the music is not telling the story in terms of sound, the book has no mechanism or take on now to tell the story, the set is far too literal and often times bloated and unnecessary. Harvey was the diretor of that show not Diane. Remember a whole creative team was hired and they wrote the show and in one of Harvey's hollywood fit's they were all fired....including the guy who wrote the original screenplay. And if you really look at that story....it doesn't sing. It's whimsical, not musical.

Waitress is definitely the best of the three here.  I saw it in both Boston and NYC and I have to say they did lots of great work on it in between to make it what you can see now.  So much better.  Is it a perfect show, no...but it works and manages to move you.  She's getting better at dramaturgy but she's no Jack O'Brien.

That being said, I don't think it's fair to call her a bad director...Hair and Pippin were wonderful.

[BroadwayNYC2]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 7:55pm

well they aren't.
 

You are completely out of touch. We forget bad shows, absolutely. This is why good shows from the Golden Age live on, and bad ones die off. The same will happen in modern times.  
 

[BroadwayNYC2]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 7:55pm

well they aren't.
 

We forget bad shows, absolutely. This is why good shows from the Golden Age live on, and bad ones die off. The same will happen in modern times.  
 

Updated On: 5/24/16 at 07:55 PM

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 8:08pm

BroadwayNYC2 said: "well they aren't.
 
You are completely out of touch. We forget bad shows, absolutely. This is why good shows from the Golden Age live on, and bad ones die off. The same will happen in modern times.  "

If I am out of touch, so are you because there is no air between what you are saying here and what I said, viz., that most new musicals are not very good. Never have been. 

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 10:12pm

No, please re-read.

What I am saying is exactly what I said, that "most new musicals are not good." 

Most new musicals (whether mounted in the golden age, now or at any other time), are bad, and most fail. Most of them never make it to Broadway. If you look at the number of musicals (or plays, for that matter) that do make it, most slink away with no afterlife. Count the number of new musicals that have appeared on Broadway in the last hundred years. Now count the number of discrete musicals that have been revived. This should help you understand my point, and also the point made in this thread that it is harder to put on a new show than a revival because a revival comes with its parts in working order. 

Most of the shows this season will never be revived, just as most of the shows from 50, 60, 70 years ago are never revived. Some seasons there may be 2-3 shows that will survive; this year, we have one. 

It has always been thus. Do you think there were only 10 playwrights in the 16th Century and that 99% of the plays written were by the same author? The cream rises to the top and things like Finding Neverland are fed to the swine. 

[sweeneytodd2]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 10:42pm

Updated On: 5/24/16 at 10:42 PM

[RippedMan]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 11:24pm

Hogans 100% correct. Where is Sher relies on his usual bag of tricks (I've seen a white wall in a few productions), I think she at least has a multitude of tricks/ideas. I don't think she has the best eye for aesthetics - that goes to Alex Timbers - but I think she manages to get good performances out of people. 

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 5/24/16 at 11:35pm

She directed the greatest scene of any show in Broadway history. Sylvia's death is just SO perfect.

[trpguyy]

Posted: 5/25/16 at 12:14am

Call_me_jorge said: "She directed the greatest scene of any show in Broadway history. Sylvia's death is just SO perfect."

And even that was ripped off from Cirque

[MoDance0934]

Posted: 5/25/16 at 9:48am

I think it's hit or miss for Diane. I saw Finding Neverland and I was not enamored. But I saw Pippin and thought it was the greatest revival I've seen. Maybe she's better with her revivals? Yet, she's directed a Cirque Du Soleil musical that is currently touring and apparently its iffy... I've been told by sources that she is a wonderful person/director and is very direct with what she wants. 

[BroadwayPeasent]

Posted: 5/25/16 at 6:20pm

I find a lot of good directors have the problems with new works. I felt that Mr Shea can also be uneven with new works . I have found unless they a Casey who while no god can do a load of good with okay material. But even he is no perfect person no one else. Unless they a Michael Mayer who directs almost anything well. Except that strange revival. I think he is very good though. 

[Owen22]

Posted: 5/25/16 at 8:43pm

I agree with you halfways... she is not a great dramaturgical director, but she is a fantastic stage picture and through line director.  And a good actor's director it seems.

[Valentina3]

Posted: 5/25/16 at 9:35pm

Hogan - are you sure none of the new musicals from this season will ever be revived 50 years from now? I really think shows Hamilton, Shuffle Along, School Of Rock all have a very decent chance at being revived. Shuffle probably less than the other two.