How is Chicago The Musical?
How is Chicago The Musical?
winston89
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/18/06
#1How is Chicago The Musical?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 2:00am
I have a VERY hazy memory of seeing Chicago around 2-3 years ago when Huey Lewis was Billy Flynn in the show. I remember that I was tired and spent the day painting sets for the show I was doing at my school and was tired because of that. I honestly have very hazy memories of the show and if I liked it or not. The album was playing in my head for the past couple of days and I was thinking of seeing it. I thought now would be a good time to see it considering that at this point in time there are no B list clebs in it.
But, overall is Chicago a good show and worth seeing? Or should I just skip it?
"If you try to shag my husband while I am still alive, I will shove the art of motorcycle maintenance up your rancid little Cu**. That's a good dear"
Tom Stoppard's Rock N Roll
Updated On: 8/3/08 at 02:00 AM
BrodyFosse123
Broadway Legend Joined: 2/27/06
#2re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 2:07am
Nah. I say skip it. The fact that its going on its 12th year on Broadway seems to be a huge fluke. Guess that 2002 Best Picture Oscar for the film-version was a fluke too.
Again... don't waste your money or your time on this poor excuse of a musical.
I recommend YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN.
winston89
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/18/06
#2re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 2:15amWhy do I have the feeling that your being sarcastic. Saying that I should see a crappy Mel Brooks musical over a musical with a score by a famous Broadway songwriting team?
"If you try to shag my husband while I am still alive, I will shove the art of motorcycle maintenance up your rancid little Cu**. That's a good dear"
Tom Stoppard's Rock N Roll
#3re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 2:17am
lol . . . do you SERIOUSLY recommend Young Frankenstein?
And as for Chicago, I love the show, but this latest revival couldn't be more painful. A friend from overseas came a few months ago and insisted that we see it, so we did. Ugh. Even the orchestra -- which you know sits right there on stage, in front of the audience -- sat and yawned and looked at their watches the whole time. . . . Not to mention the dancers, whose all-black costumes, now a dingy grey, looked like they had been purchased at K-mart, oh, say, 12 years ago.
Skip it. I mean it. Please.
#4re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 2:21am
The show itself is great. If i was there i would buy a ticket in a heartbeat.
Well I didn't want to get into it, but he's a Satanist.
Every full moon he sacrifices 4 puppies to the Dark Lord and smears their blood on his paino.
This should help you understand the score for Wicked a little bit more.
Tazber's: Reply to
Is Stephen Schwartz a Practicing Christian
BrodyFosse123
Broadway Legend Joined: 2/27/06
#5re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 3:13am
The amount of idiots on this board (yes... me included) is simply mind-blowing.
Oy!
LePetiteFromage
Broadway Legend Joined: 1/19/08
winston89
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/18/06
#8re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 5:14amI would have assumed that on this site I didn't have to say How is Chicago the Musical doing. But, I guess not.
"If you try to shag my husband while I am still alive, I will shove the art of motorcycle maintenance up your rancid little Cu**. That's a good dear"
Tom Stoppard's Rock N Roll
mauriposa
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/14/05
#9re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 5:25amJ'adore LePetiteFromage. I was going to do that, too, but chickened out at the last minute. Oh, and no offense, Winston. It's just a joke.
#10re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 5:46amOh, Winston.
"Winning a Tony this year is like winning Best Attendance in third grade: no one will care but the winner and their mom."
-Kad
"I have also met him in person, and I find him to be quite funny actually. Arrogant and often misinformed, but still funny."
-bjh2114 (on Michael Riedel)
-Kad
"I have also met him in person, and I find him to be quite funny actually. Arrogant and often misinformed, but still funny."
-bjh2114 (on Michael Riedel)
#11re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 7:02am
If I'd got to the thread earlier, y'all would have had to content yourself with the one-word answer "Windy". LePetiteFromage took the joke and expanded on it with infinitely more class than I could ever manage. :)
StockardFan
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/19/08
#12re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 11:00am
I didn't get LePetiteFromage's post at first because I guess Winston has edited the subject line. I was like Huh?
Good one, LePetite!
KFTC!!!!!
#13re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 11:42amIt's a great musical, the current production is great BUT speaking for the London production now, it's getting abit tired because alot of the cast members' been there since Day 1 or sth like that and stunt castings as well... it's just not the amazing show it was but I guess it's still worth checking out! It's simple and it's slick. Watching it on a good day, it can easily be one of my fav. shows ever!
All That Jazz
Check out & support my drawings @ www.facebook.com/felixdrawings
#14re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 1:25pm
When it first opened, it was fantastic. It was a different take, it brought new life to it, and the cast was just top-notch.
NOW...
The show has whored itself out to no end to keep air in it's sails, it's changed theaters twice, the cast is essentially just a training camp for up-and-coming new talents, and it's overall just tired. It's no longer fresh or "razzle dazzle"y.
I'd say that since you've seen it before, keep your memory hazy and don't bother seeing it again. Don't waste your time. See something new.
#15re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 1:31pm
It really just depends on the cast. The score, choreography, and story will always be GREAT no matter what. But the cast's energy is also very important. They have many new names in the ensemble now, so there should be some freshness. Plus Michelle DeJean is a STELLAR Roxie. There's a new Velma, but I haven't heard much. Plus Tom Wopat and Carol Woods are always reliable in their roles.
And the fact this show can still play houses of 90% attendance is pretty amazing. I don't see any signs of stopping it. I can see it making 15 years.
#16re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 1:44pmConsidering the fact that you saw Huey Lewis, it's probably best your memory is hazy.
#17re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 1:46pmOh, don't get me wrong here. The show itself (writing and music) will always and forever be one of my all-time favorites. Yes, it's doing 80ish and above just ABOUT every week, but only because they bring in stars to direct attention it's way and to boost promotion and then the stars leave and tourists keep on coming. That doesn't necessarily make the production any better. Once upon a time, the revival was the "it" show. Now, it's allure is fading in my eyes.
#18re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 1:48pmThere really haven't been that many stars lately. Tom Wopat is a theatre veteran. I hardly consider him a name brought in to sell tickets. Plus he's been doing this show for years. And he's the only one in the cast right that could be considered a name.
#19re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 1:56pmThat's my point. They bring in the stars and then trickle them out to fake out the tourists.
#20re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 2:01pm
You missed my point. Tom Wopat wasn't brought in to sell tickets. He's been performing in CHICAGO for years. And quite frankly I doubt his name could sell tickets to tourists.
I can't even remember the last stars brought in. I think it was the two from the Sopranos last fall.
#21re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 2:09pm
I'm not saying Tom Wopat is a star.
I can't think off the top of my head who they've been bringing in. But every few months, someone new comes in and the big billboard reappears everywhere in Times Sq. with "insert celeb name here" front and center. No, not big stars. But names. Someone you know enough to say "Gee, I'd love to see him/her in that."
But it's not a question of whether it's doing good business or not. It's a question of "Is it worth the time and money to see it again now?" The answer would definitely be a no. Yes, the theater it's in (while a terrible looking theater) is suited perfectly for such a production, the show has lost it's original luster.
#22re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 2:36pm
I totally agree with so many in this thread: CHICAGO, the musical, is fantastic. The music, the original choreography. It's really one of the best.
And, the cast's energy can make or break the show. As I mentioned in my previous post, people on stage were actually yawning when I saw it. That can't be a good sign.
Then, there's the Ambassador. Do people agree or disagree with me that this venue is simply to BIG for Chicago?
For me, the ideal stage would be the same as in the movie version: an elegant, seedy, smoke-filled burlesque stage somewhere in . . . well, Chicago.
Peace.
#23re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 3:06pm
That kind of IS the staging of this particular production. It's like a seedy nightclub. That's why the idea of the production is great. It's just grown tired over the years is all. If the idea was somehow re-envisioned, it would be wonderful.
I think the Ambassador needs some renovations, but I think the size of the theater is just fine.
#24re: How is Chicago?
Posted: 8/3/08 at 3:20pm
I suppose I was hoping to feel like I was IN the seedy burlesque theater -- not watching it from afar -- just like the 50 or so patrons are in the movie, sitting around tables, smoking and drinking, as Queen Latifah comes down and rubs her ginormous boobs and feather boa in their faces.
No, I can't say I felt that in the 1,100+ seat auditorium at the Ambassador.
Did anyone see CHARLIE BROWN there? How did that go over?
(Another show that would work better, I think, in around a 100-seat house.)
