A Tale of Two Cities= A Tale of Two Acts (8/20, 8 PM)

[adamgreer]

Posted: 8/21/08 at 12:24am

The good news about this show? It's not the disaster that some people predicted it would be.

The bad news? It's still not a very good show.

I love a good costume drama, mega-musical, so I went in to A Tale of Two Cities tonight hoping to like it. I read the novel as part of my junior year English class in high school, and remembered really enjoying it (though I don't recall a lot of the plot). I had hopes for this one...

Unfortunately, the show can best be described as a mess. There are some moments and some numbers that REALLY work, but the moments that don't work are awful.

The central problem with the show as it stands right now, is that they've taken a novel with a huge scope and tried to compress everything into a nearly 3 hour musical. Unfortunately, what happens is that because there are so many characters, we don't get to see much of any of them, and therefore, the characterizations are incomplete.

The show misses an opportunity right from the get go. The novel contains what is easily the most famous opening line in all of western literature. You'd think the show would have the good sense to begin with those lines. You know...as the overture ends, and the orchestra swells, those lines are spoken just as the curtain comes up. No can do. The line is spoken later on, in passing, by a drunk James Barbour, then mentioned offhand later in the show by one of the women (I forget who).

Act 1 could stand to lose a good twenty minutes, easily. The show wouldn't suffer in the least. They could start by cutting the horrible grave-robbing number.

The first act consists mostly of exposition, and as such is not all that engaging. In fact, the majority of it is downright boring. People come, people go (Grand Hotel reference!!), but they don't do a whole lot. Plenty of "I want" moments, but no one really does anything about their desires.

The evening's low point is the act 1 finale. They should have saved us all the trouble and just acquired the rights to Do You Hear the People Sing, because that's what the number basically is. Even worse, the staging is nearly identical, right down to the people standing in a line, marching forward with fig rising from the stage. I kept waiting for Gavroche to come running out with the flag. The final stage picture from the first act has them all holding up guns in that pose. I mean, come on, surely they could do better?

Fortunately, I didn't act on my impulse, which was telling me to leave, because act 2 is much, much, much, better. It's tighter, there are some higher stakes, and it's finally dramatically interesting and engaging. A lot of the rather useless secondary characters disappear, allowing us to focus on the core story.

The score is a poor man's Les Miserables. There are some pretty melodies, but for the most part, a lot of the lyrics are just awful. Very amateurish. Also, I think there too many ballads, particularly in the middle of the first act.

The set consists of four moving platforms that don't move on their own, so the stagehands wheel them on and off. Then, they just sit down onstage to wait to move them off. Very strange. The platforms are also LOUD whenever they're moved. It's a bit busy.

The lighting design is very red. Very red. There was a strange lighting mishap in act 1, but I'm sure they'll fix that.

The cast does their best with poor material. As I mentioned earlier, because they tried to stick so much into this show, most of the characters get very little to do, and their roles are not well developed.

Barbour's singing is fantastic, and his acting is very good. He is the only character that is really developed beyond the surface. He's appropriately brooding, and even darkly comedic. The show definitely belongs to him.

I agree with the sentiment that Brandi Burkhardt needs to be replaced, be it by Christianne Noll or someone else. She doesn't sing that well, and her acting is off.

Aaron Lazar gets very little to do, but sounds great. The same can be said for Natalie Toro, who knocks her act 1 solo out of the park, but is hampered by terrible lyrics ("out of sight, out of mind"?????).

The rest of the talented featured players, including Greg Edelmann, Nick Wyman, and Kevin Earley, fail to make much of an impression. The exception is Katherine McGrath as Miss Pross, whose performance at least makes an impression on the audience.

Overall, not the worst show I've seen, but not a very good one either. They've got major work to do if they're going to make this work.


Updated On: 8/21/08 at 12:24 AM

[EugLoven]

Posted: 8/21/08 at 12:36am

That was a very calculated and "not very dirty" review, sir. Good writing, people will appreciate that. I mean, you sounded utterly crushed during intermission, I'm surprised your opinion isn't more impassioned --- Act 2 must have really done some good clean up.

I don't want to start throwing-out comparisons, but it's sounding like TALE is running a similar course to LESTAT: A big sweeping musical based on a big sweeping novel with big sweeping sets and plot too heavy to lift onto a B-list cast's shoulders.

And if I close my eyes, all I can picture are period-piece costumes in red-lighting. Those actors will probably be exiting the stage-door every night with a whole big stack of rewrites to memorize for the next day. Updated On: 8/21/08 at 12:36 AM

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 8/21/08 at 12:38am

Why is it that every review of this show makes me think more of Pirate Queen than Les Miz?

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 8/21/08 at 12:52am

I was there tonight as well - hi Adam! - and I agree with most of your comments.

By the end of the show, I was calling it "Barbour!" because his character totally overshadows the entire thing, and you'd think for a big epic musical, they give more focus to the other characters.

The show definitely has potential, because it actually ended up being an interesting watch through Act 2. But Act 1 is SUCH a problem, from the exposition song that was basically prose spoken with a long last syllable to make thing it's a lyric, to the three Barbour ballads in a row (too much of a good thing). And that Mrs. Prosse (sp?) seriously needed her stage time cut down, the walk on-"funny" line-walk off got tiresome real fast. And the gravesite number? Almost wanted to walk out.

Lyrically, there was no cliche or rhymic scheme that was left untouched (including two very distinctice 20th century colloquisms). And the song just had so many words in them, I could phase out half the song and not miss a thing.

What this show really needs to succeed is to step back, and start cutting lyrics left and right. Otherwise it's just diarrhea of the mouth.

That said, the audience, clearly in the need for a mega-musical not based on a movie, seemed to eat it up. So with a lot of cold-blooded pruning, and a better ad campaign (or any ad campaign), the show could actually have some legs.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 8/21/08 at 9:28am

The show definitely has potential, because it actually ended up being an interesting watch through Act 2.

That's just it. In act 2, the stakes are finally upped, and the show gets interesting. They really need to do extensive work on the first act to make it work.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/21/08 at 9:42am

The problems with the set sound stupid. If it's on Broadway I'd expect the set to workout with the use of stagehands. It should have be designed to fit the space.

Also, is "out of sight, out of mind" - is that a line from the book? It does seem a big 20th/21st Century lingo.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 8/21/08 at 9:44am

I don't recall, actually. I'm sure someone here could tell you. I highly doubt it, because as you said, it's very colloquial.

And yeah, they really need to do something about the stagehands that hang out onstage. Terribly unprofessional.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 8/21/08 at 9:51am

These reviews are reminding me more of LITTLE WOMEN....an earnest, blah musical that just has too much stuff going on to be packed into a 2 1/2 hour show and not enough ingenuity to make it work.

[Eagleman]

Posted: 8/21/08 at 10:49am

Deja Vu!

Lestat came to mind also.

There were a handful of raves but for each race there have been two or three pans.
That's not the figs you want.

Worse still is the consensus opinion of almost everyone that Act I has to be reworked considerably. That's usually the kiss of death in an adaptation with a classic, popular work because the author got it right and the librettist wasn't up to the task.

When you start with a novel with a timeless resolution of the main character's conflict, it's pretty hard to get Act II wrong. The challenge is to set Act One up.

I've thought from the beginning "Until Tomorrow" had to be cut and substituted with, perhaps, a song by two major characters in the vein of "Lilly's Eyes". It's a slam dunk the critics are going to be unforgiving about that moment, so much so that it may color everything else they observe.

I don't know what they were thinking to sign off on that.






Updated On: 8/21/08 at 10:49 AM

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 8/21/08 at 11:18am

Adam- Excellent spot on review! I couldn't agree with you more, especially about that dreadful Les Mis-esque act one finale. Let's hope they keep the good, and trim/change the bad.

[DefyGravity777]

Posted: 8/21/08 at 9:32pm

Nice review. Looks like I won't be seeing this. I'm not one for boring shows.

[BroadwayBaby6]

Posted: 8/22/08 at 4:19pm

What people are missing is not whether it's a great show or not. It would have been a huge hit in the 80's when big "pop operas" were de rigeur. Collective tastes have changed and this type of show and this type of music is just not what NYC audiences want to see.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 8/22/08 at 4:26pm

I don't think this would have been a huge hit in the 1980's. As I mentioned before, it's not as interesting or as compelling as Les Miserables, or even Phantom, is onstage (I'm talking about the stage adaptations, NOT the source material).

I think there is still an audience for a "pop opera." Phantom, remember, still routinely sells out.

[stevenycguy]

Posted: 8/23/08 at 8:04pm

I loved Les Miserables and Phantom (saw both many times) but absolutely hated Little Women, Jane Eyre & Coram Boy (convoluted plot, way too much plot). Do you think I'd enjoy Tale of Two Cities?
Updated On: 8/23/08 at 08:04 PM

[blaxx]

Posted: 8/23/08 at 8:21pm

They should have saved us all the trouble and just acquired the rights to Do You Hear the People Sing, because that's what the number basically is. Even worse, the staging is nearly identical, right down to the people standing in a line, marching forward with fig rising from the stage. I kept waiting for Gavroche to come running out with the flag.

I think you mean "One Day More".

[Eagleman]

Posted: 8/23/08 at 8:51pm

"Oklahoma" was dead in the water until R & H came up with an 11th-hour change in the score that made the show a classic.

Miss S. may be just one flash of creativity away from a resolution
to the problems people have observed about the show that sends
t off on a completely different but artistically more compelling vector.

It happens.
Updated On: 8/23/08 at 08:51 PM

[taximom]

Posted: 8/23/08 at 9:10pm

I just got back from the 2 pm matinee. I couldn't disagree more. The leads were uniformly excellent - believe me, I'm dead tired of going to Broadway shows where leads either can't sing or can't act. That is not the case here. Also, I was just telling someone I loved the lighting and although I agree that the first act was a bit long, I was never bored and neither was anyone in the audience. This show is lush and engaging and sung and acted brilliantly. The audience, without exception, was on its feet when the first members of the ensemble came forward at curtain call.

Don't believe the cynical nay sayers! This show is a hit.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/23/08 at 11:05pm

At least Act 2 is good. If people are leaving the theater feeling good about the show (because they don't remember Act 1) then that's not so bad.

[Eagleman]

Posted: 8/23/08 at 11:15pm

I remember hearing a woman at the end of Act One apologizing to her mother that she had dragged her from Westchester to New York to see Steppenwolf's staging of "The Grapes of Wrath".

I smiled not meaning to offend her and she said, "Do you think this is GOOD?"

I replied that the company (under Frank Galati's direction) should be given the benefit of the doubt and be permitted to tell the entire story before skewering the production.

When the lights finally dimmed on Rose of Charon and the house went dark she was the first one on her feet for a standing ovation.

[Midnight Radio]

Posted: 8/23/08 at 11:29pm

I have to agree that the show really is all over the place. The highlight for me was the play at the start of act II. I thought the Marie and Louis part was beautiful and haunting, unfortunately I cannot say the same for the rest of the show. As a person who has not brushed up on the story in quite a while, I found it all very confusing and while pretty to look at, for the majority I had no idea what was going on. The show is basically just a showcase for Barbour's voice and fails to make much of an impression beyond that...

And the CHEESE:

**SPOILERS**

The giant guillotine backdrop slice, the staircase to the stars. They seemed so out of place and style of the show.
Not to mention the tacky, tacky, tacky projection of the title onto the scrim after the show had started. I could not believe that...

**END SPOILERS**

[adamgreer]

Posted: 8/23/08 at 11:33pm

The giant guillotine backdrop slice, the staircase to the stars.

The amusing thing about that is that they make a huge deal out of saying the execution is to take place in the morning. Yet, suddenly, as he ascends those stairs, it is nighttime, and the stars are out.

[MyLife]

Posted: 8/24/08 at 12:46am

I was also at the 2pm matinee today and was blown away. I thought the entire cast was outstanding, particularly Barbour. Though the tunes weren't necessarily memorable, they were very moving. I got student rush tickets in the front row ($27) and the people to both sides of me and behind me were weeping midway through act II. During intermission people were saying it's great and mind-blowing but it's not Les Miz. No, it's not Les Miz, it's A Tale of Two Cities. Just because it's a classic novel involving the French Revolution doesn;t mean it's Les Miz (even though one of the numbers is staged the same, it works). I would see this show again if given the time!

I am a firm believer in you don't know whether you will enjoy a show until you see it. Take every review with a grain of salt, and review it for yourself.

[marlomanners]

Posted: 8/24/08 at 12:48am

I saw it twice in Sarasota. Loved it. Haven't seen it in NYC. Agree the comedic gravedigger number can go. The stars and "guillotine slice" were not present in Sarasota. Loved Barbour in spite of Xenu and the RPF (google it). At first I thought the show's biggest problem was that epic literary musicals were not currently in vogue, but after reading some of the positive reports, I think maybe the audience for that type of show still exists and is underserved. That could be an asset for TOTC. I wouldn't count it out yet.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/24/08 at 12:54am

So sitting front row is an okay view?

[MyLife]

Posted: 8/24/08 at 1:05am

Rentboy,
they stamp the seats "Partial View" but I thought the seats were fine. There are footlights at the front of the stage that blocked the, literally, first minute of the show because it takes place so far back. You didn't miss anything other than that. Some of the action takes place on a second level of the wooden moving platforms so you did have to look up, straining your neck, but I didn't mind. It was only for a couple minutes at a time. No one in the row seemed to mind