Aspects of Love

[glitzguy3]

Posted: 9/16/03 at 9:40am

so...

what are people's opinions of aspects of love? i never really liked it, but the more i make myself listen to it, the more i like it!!!

[JohnPopa]

Posted: 9/16/03 at 9:48am

It's garbage. 4 songs repeated endlessly into a numbing drone, cliched lyrics ('is this really me, am I dreaming?',) a story that makes it impossible to care about any of the characters and a quiet story about people talking forced into the sung-through structure to the point of characters singing 'shall I make some coffee?'

I honestly think it's one of the worst musicals ever written, and I have nothing against Andrew Lloyd Webber.

[QueenS]

Posted: 9/16/03 at 9:53am

I didn't like it very much after a few listenings and put it away for a while. I was also not a fan of the book at all. Couldn't believe that anyone would have decided to musicalize it.

However, when I saw it, I enjoyed the performances very much and subsequently began to have a better appreciation for the recording. Though, I do think that was mostly due to it reminding me of the performances that I saw, not the work itself.

Posted: 9/16/03 at 10:45am

I thought it was very clever how each character had their own song and then ALW did variations of those songs as they spoke. The concept was interesting even if it didn't pull off quite like he would have liked.
I personally enjoy the show and will heartidly recommend the book (if you can find a copy) It is written by David Garnett as it was a book first.

Posted: 9/16/03 at 10:46am

...sorry double post... Updated On: 9/16/03 at 10:46 AM

Posted: 9/16/03 at 2:30pm

I LOVE Aspects of Love. What a wonderful score, one of my favorites of ALW. It's a great listen while driving excpet for the fact that the digital transfer on the cd isn't very good and many parts are soft, then suddenly tremendously loud.

but what a great concept, what a love triangle! great songs! such tragedy and human despair, it's rather twisted with Jenny falling for her cousin, yet jenny's innocense is one of the strong points of the show.

"anything but lonely" is a personal favorite, although i prefer sarah brightman's rendition.

ofcourse "Love Changes Everything" "Seeing is Believing" all of Jenny's songs "The Mermaid Song" "Falling"

I love it because it is NOT a typical show in the least bit. Great Great! I just bought the book and will read it soon! :)

[sharon1]

Posted: 9/16/03 at 2:37pm

I have never seen the play, but I have listened over and over again to the London cast recording and I love it.

Posted: 9/16/03 at 2:40pm

right, i have never seen the play either. but like you, i listen to it alot. :)

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/16/03 at 3:23pm

After watching the performance on the Tonys that year I thought the show should have been sponsored by Campho Penique and billed as "Aspects of Love: The Cold Sore Musical."

Love, it changes everything.

[Cadriel]

Posted: 9/16/03 at 3:56pm

Personally?

Based on listening to the concept album, I'd really, really love to direct a small, intimate production of the show.

It's a sung-through musical, and it's virtually inevitable that it has some book problems and some flat lines (I don't think that Black and Hart will be much remembered for any of their lyrics). And it's very definitely theme-heavy. But what I adore about Aspects of Love is its ability to evoke mood and emotion through its music. It's an ethereal, heady piece that requires a lot of delicacy from every angle to make it seem anything but crass, but I seriously think it's one of the most underrated scores of the '80s, and a show that could be great given the chance to.

I understand why people would walk away hating it, but I also think that those people are denying themselves a good experience. Me? I was enchanted from the first listen.

(BTW - note that there are a lot more songs than the detractors would admit: "Love Changes Everything," "Seeing is Believing," "Chanson d'Enfance," "The Journey of a Lifetime," "Leading Lady," "The First Man You Remember," "There Is More to Love," "Mermaid Song," "Hand Me the Wine and the Dice," and "Anything But Lonely" all come to mind. It's just that the recitative can be a little tiresome if you don't care for the melodies.)

-Wayne

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 9/16/03 at 4:47pm

I would like the show more if it weren't so damn repetitive. It ran for 3 years right? Not bad.

Posted: 9/16/03 at 4:54pm

true about the repetition but it's the running theme of the show. it's also cool to hear rose sing through the melodies, then wehn jenny falls for alex she begins to sing those melodies as well. the running theme is love changes everything and someone at some point does sing that melody.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 9/16/03 at 6:52pm

I saw it on Broadway and enjoyed it. I think the songs are nice: "A Memory of A Happy Moment" "The Mermaid Song", etc..

Posted: 9/16/03 at 7:01pm

I enjoyed the set the most. Do not get me wrong the show is one of my favorites. Saw it on a Friday and then went back and saw it Saturday.

The set was neat cause the walls to the villa would crack open and become the mountains. I thought that was neat.

Also it only ran for about 9 months on Broadway.
It did tour with Sarah Brightman for a while that I also got to see... But I did fall in love with Ann Crumb at that time.

[jo]

Posted: 9/16/03 at 8:21pm

Defnitely my favourite Andrew Lloyd Webber musical and musical score! I like the semi-operatic structure, the achingly romantic songs, and even the use of recitatives is very evocative. And because of the theme and the way he composed the music around it, it reminds me a lot of Stephen Sondheim.

Its most well known song is Love Changes Everything. And there are other memorable ones -- the gorgeous duet Seeing is Believing, Anything But Lonely, The First Man You Remember, The Mermaid Song, Other Pleasures, Chanson D'Enfance, Hand Me the Wine and the Dice, Journey of a Lifetime, A Memory of a Happy Moment, There is More to Love, etc... One of my favourite musical passages is a recitative between Alex and Jenny set to the music of Love Changes Everything simply called Track # 23!

The theme of intertwining loves and their complicated relationships was a little too bold for the stage at the time the book was musicalized. I have read the book by David Garnett -he belonged to the Bohemian group of writers in England called the Bloomsbury Group in mid-century ( most well known was his sister in law Virginia Woolf - the subject of the movie THE HOURS) and it is not surprising that the theme is unconventional. The musical is very faithful to this novella.

The cast in London ( which recorded the album) was perfect -- the same four lead stars on Broadway ( Michael Ball, Ann Crumb, Kevin Colson and Kathleen Rowe McAllen) and Diana Morrison who is perfect as Jenny. Michael has a magnificent voice - singing or emoting. Not bad to look at either... Ann Crumb was also very suited to the role of the French actress - a sultry personality with a very good voice.

If you had seen the show on stage, then you must recall the attractive sets ( especially the eye-popping scene of the Pyrenees Mountain in southern France) and the rather European feel to the musical.

It is a score which grows on you - the more you listen to it, the more the enchantment grows. It's a CD which is always near my record-player as I find the music very evocative, poignant, and very romantic. Do give it a try!

Jo Updated On: 9/16/03 at 08:21 PM

[Cadriel]

Posted: 9/16/03 at 9:45pm

I have to say - perhaps the greatest pleasure of the OLC album is Kevin Colson, whose constant charm ought to be on more recordings. He created Walter in London's Chess, and it's a true shame that particular performance was lost. I'd love to see him live in something.

-Wayne

[Musetta1957]

Posted: 9/17/03 at 12:53am

Michael Ball drives me crazy these days, but he was fine in this role.

As for the show itself, as others have said -- the concept was fine, execution lacking. The leitmotifs were interesting and purposeful, but there were far too few of them.

It's a nice relief to have "Falling" in act 2 because it's the first original tune you've heard after an hour and a half! (Or more, at that point.)

[alterego]

Posted: 9/17/03 at 4:00am

I saw this show on Broadway in January of 1991. At the time Sarah Brightman was starring, at intermission the only thing that made me stay for the second act was a blizzard.Tedious and very, very boring.

[Belter]

Posted: 9/17/03 at 4:14am

I saw this show during a week in August 1990 when I saw EVERYTHING playing on Bdwy. We only went to it, however, as it was playing on a Monday, when a lot of other things we wanted to see were closed.

I remember walking in and saying to my friend "Well, this looks full of angst!"

Cut to the chase .... we loved it.

At the intermission we turned to each other and said at the same time "This is great!"....

And WOW! Michael Ball live!!! Not for looks (only), but for SOUND. That man -- when he sings the last note of LOVE CHANGES EVERYTHING -- it goes right through you like an arrow -- I was shocked back into my seat. On the recording it doesn't come off the same, unfortunately, which would lead some people to misjudge the show -- as also, other songs don't play as well on the recording.

My friend who I was with had just lost her father in June, so she found the song of the father "The first man you remember" and the moments between father and daughter particularly moving. I loved the actor/actress stuff at the beginning when Alex was visiting Rose at the theatre and then after for a drink. And my favorite song is actually that recording that skips! I can only remember some of the words ... "Parlez vous francais? Je suis sad." .... I loved that song!

We left the theatre and ran right out to a store and bought the CD!

Here it is 13 years later and we both still consider it a favorite show.

Incidentally, we saw Ann Crumb's understudy -- so it's not the performers particularly (exception: M. Ball), but the show. I do like sung-though, don't mind if they're talking about the laundry -- after all, the most famous aria in Delibes' Lakme has two sopranos dueting singing about nothing and it's extremely well loved!

I'd love to do a production of it, someday.

[jo]

Posted: 9/17/03 at 4:48am

Hi BelterBabe,

I was lucky to have seen both the London and the Broadway productions, which had some slight differences. The Broadway production was tighter and some of the songs were rewritten. Unfortunately, no Broadway production recording was released on an album.

Talking about Michael -- he is releasing a new album with some great standards ( What Are You Doing the Rest of Your Life, a duet with Antonio Banderas for Me and My Shadow, I Wish You Love, etc..). I am also going to attend one of his concerts in his upcoming concert tour in the UK.

Btw, if you want to hear a few more notes with arrow-like impact, try listening to the London version of PASSION where he sings the role of Giorgio.

Jo

[John4763]

Posted: 9/17/03 at 6:31am

I saw Aspects of Love on Broadway many years ago. Michael Ball and John Cullum were in it.

I've never heard the recording, but I do remember thinking that the music itself was good. I enjoyed the first act, but after intermission the audience was noticeably smaller than it was at the beginning.

I found the second act extremely boring. The show probably should have closed many months before it did. But word was that ALW kept it open longer so that it wouldn't be counted an official "flop"

I had really forgotten about this show. I'll bet the recording is good.

But whose idea was it to make a musical about an obscure Harlequin romance novel?

[Cadriel]

Posted: 9/17/03 at 8:40am

Lloyd Webber fixated on Garnett's novella (which is more of a proper novella than a Harlequin romance, and is reasonably entertaining as short reads go) from the early 1980s onward. By all reports, it's a project that was quite near and dear to him. It's sort of an interesting footnote that, in 1981 or 1982, Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice had not yet left their partnership. They actually spent some time trying to convince the other that Aspects of Love and Chess - their pet concepts - were worthwhile projects. Lloyd Webber was as unmoved by the concept of Chess as Rice was by Aspects of Love, and both found other partnerships.

Both musicals turned out to be shows directed by Trevor Nunn, with Kevin Colson featured prominently in the original London cast, and both ran for three years in London and under a year on Broadway. Aspects of Love had two lyricists, while Chess had two composers. I personally feel that Phantom of the Opera killed the Broadway chances for both shows (Chess opened too soon afterward, and the critics had their knives out and sharpened for ALW after Phantom). Frank Rich wrote scathingly negative reviews of both shows, and neither won a single Tony Award.

-Wayne

Posted: 9/17/03 at 8:57am

I have on thing to say: MICHAEL BALL. That was enough to prompt me to buy the London Cast Recording. *sigh* Now, I agree, it's not the most incredible work ever written, but how I adore Mister Ball and his voice, (and that irresitible smile).

Posted: 9/17/03 at 2:17pm

My favourite ALW show no doubt about it.

[baz]

Posted: 9/17/03 at 3:34pm

My favourite musical altogether. It was just magic but you needed to see it at least a couple of times to pick up all the nuances.

The original four, Ann Crumb, Michael Ball, Kevin Colson and Kathleen Rowe McAllen were the best, nobody else could match them even Sarah Brightman who was not the ideal Rose.

By the way was John Cullum in it and what role? Keven Colson and Michael Ball left at the same time - I don't remember seeing John Cullum during Michael's time with Aspects on Broadway.