I recently saw an absolutely horrible production of Matilda in the chicago area and it made me wonder about regional theatres borrowing the concepts from broadway productions. This same regional theatre put on South Pacific last season and besides a few details here and there it was an almost exact replica of the Bart Sher LCT South Pacific. It was glorious and outstanding.... Matilda on the other hand was its own iteration. I'm not saying regional theatres have to use the concepts from the broadway counterparts. But there are shows that just don't work with radically different ideas once you've come to love the broadway production. With this instance, matilda on broadway was so loved, praised, and in nearly every aspect PERFECT. Literally Matthew Warchus was robbed of a tony for beautiful piece that he had assembled for so many years. This regional production took the broadway production and turned it on its head. It took something subdued, quiet, and rather minimalistic and over stated it ten fold. The choreography was way other the top, the projections were 1)not working properly and 2)just plain ugly, and worst of all instead of having the glorious image of the swings for when i grow up they had adults lip sync to the voices of their child counterparts, which was just plainly awkward and outrageous. This whole production has really made question if I should ever see another production there...
So they took a risk that didn't pay off. That shouldn't completely turn you off from a company that has continually produced excellent work and has in recent years demonstrated efforts to challenge their subscriber base. Like any longstanding institution, they've produced some sublime theatre and some truly atrocious theatre... it's all part of the game. You can rest assured that this theatre probably won't be hiring that director again.
You're right that Matthew Warchus's work on the original was brilliant, but he's also the man who brought us Ghost: the Musical. Everyone will swing and miss on occasion, but that shouldn't invalidate their successes, and it shouldn't lead you to hope for a lack of originality in future productions.
The great thing about Regional theatres in the Chicago area is that the ones that there are a lot of risks that are taken with content and direction. As stated sometimes it pays off and sometimes it doesn't. That theatre has produced both great shows and clunkers but has a hefty subscriber base that can do so. Steppenwolf has the same thing, as does Lookingglass, Goodman and Paramount in Aurora (as well as countless store front and non-equity companies). These theatres consistently take risks and many have made a name for themselves nationally in doing so. Because something didn't work, does not mean you should write off the company completely. The most rewarding experiences I have had at the theatre have all been in Chicago (and I go to NYC often) and various theatres and have included plays that were bizarre and may have not worked for some. MOVE ON.
Also of note, Matilda is not directed by a Chicago director or any sort of resident director at that theatre.
It also has to do with rights, a lot of the time there are clauses when you do a licensed a production that the production design can NOT use certain elements of the 'first class' productions. Some things can not be changed like location and script, but they are picky about copying designs from the original.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27199361@N08/ Phantom at the Royal Empire Theatre
Even if the rights allowed for elements like the swings, not every company would have the money, the right kind of space or the production team to make certain elements of a show work.
Theater shouldn’t be frozen in one version forever.
Another day, another dollar is the reality of my mentality. Otherwise, don't even bother.- TLC
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if productions borrow or recreate elements from a "first class" production are they not supposed to note somewhere that is was based on the original staging or choreography of, John Smith- obviously just an example.
The licensing agreement for “Matilda” states that you cannot copy any of the original production designs. It specifically mentions that you cannot use swings or letter tiles.
Yeah, I've seen some solid shows there (Hello Dolly, Next to Normal, Spelling Bee) as well as leaving during intermission for Curtains. But then, all theatre companies and theatre in Chicago in general is wildly inconsistent. Matilda is one I'm only likely to see again in London as this regional production sounds exactly like what I feared I would witness. I got burned by a regional production of Urinetown MANY years ago (not the Mercury Theatre production) that was, frankly, embarrassing beyond belief. I don't even find Drury Lane's new season to be interesting enough to qualify the trip to the burbs.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
joined:1/9/15
joined:
1/9/15
Posted: 5/7/19 at 11:05pm