After "Glory Days" was over, as I compared noted with my parents, all three of us seemed to have the same reaction: If I had been in an aisle seat, I would have walked out. Note that the show is ninety minutes long with NO INTERMISSION. Then came the, how long did it take before you started looking at your watch - for me it was forty-five minutes (followed by forty-six, forty seven, forty-eight, forty-nine, and fifty...), my mother was thirty, and I think my father slept through the whole thing. Really, I can't think of a nice thing to say about it. Well, okay - the four person cast does a decent job. None of them are spectacular, but consider the material they have to work with. It's strange - listening to the songs posted on the show's Myspace page made me sort of excited to see the musical - yes, they are a little Jonathon Larson-y sounding, but they seemed young and fun. But when sung in the context of the show, by characters that I found not remotely likable, they seemed to lose all of their charm. They also all started to sound the same. "Glory Days" is about four guys who were friends in high school, who then come together after their first year of college and find they don't like each other anymore. The thing is, they all come across as the jerky frat boy types - the sort of people I would avoid eye contact with in the hall and hope would ignore me - so I couldn't have been less interested in spending five, let alone ninety minutes with them. Four unlikeable guys who don't even like each other. What is supposed to be entertaining about this? Granted, sometimes people being mean to each other can be fun. But this doesn't come across as real mean - it's more like watching them stand facing each other, close their eyes and look away, and fake slap each other. I mean, the whole thing could have been told in about thirty seconds:
Guy A: Hi.
Guy B: Hi.
Guy C: Hi.
Guy D: Hi.
(pause)
Guy A: You suck.
Guy B: No you suck.
Guy C: No you suck.
Guy D: I'm gay.
(pause)
Guy A: Whatever - bye.
Guy B: Sh... bye.
Guy C: Bye.
Guy D: Bye.
The end.
As for the production values, well the set should be easy to replicate for community theatres. There's a wall of lights and bleachers. And that's it. Oh, and there are some exposed bulbs hanging down, so when they sing a song about "electric stars," they can turn on and the audience can literally see electric stars. The whole lighting design looks like some cheap Kevin Adams rip off. That anyone would have the nerve to charge $97.50 for a show with no set and no stars (not to mention no entertainment value) is mind boggling. And really, who is the target audience for this show? Being in my mid-20's, I would think I would be what would be considered the target age set for this show. But maybe it's not just 20-somethings, but frat boy 20-somethings. And doesn't that just put this musical in the same hole as "High Fidelity" - aka a musical whose target audience hates musicals? One of the main producers must have had his name removed from the Playbill - namely Max Bialystock. Because who else would have moved this to Broadway?
To end on a positive note, since the music was actually pretty good, at least outside of the context of the show, I look forward to see what composer/lyricist Nick Blaemire writes next. Hopefully something with a book that doesn't make "In My Life" look like "Gypsy."
On a happier note, I also went to see "In The Heights" this week. Compared to "Glory Days," it's "Gypsy," "Sunday in the Park..." and "Spring Awakening" (those being my three favorite currently running Broadway shows) all rolled into one, I actually found it more satisfying than I did off-Broadway. The book remains its weak point - it presents such a white-washed view of Washington Heights, with nothing of consequence really happening at all, it's more "Sesame Street" than "Avenue Q," and that should be the other way around. That said, the cast is so bursting with the energy that it's really impossible, I think, to dislike it. The music is for the most part extremely tuneful and entertaining (though I don't think it really warrants the 2-cd set that it's been given), even if there are some duds like that awful song they wrote for Priscilla Lopez (called "Enough" - coincidentally also what I wanted to yell out while she was singing it) only there because she was upset that she didn't have a song. The choreography is fun in small bursts, though when it steps center-stage, like in the overlong final song/scene in the first act, I found myself extremely bored. Then again, I'm usually not really a fan of long dance sequences. Flaws aside, the show is harmless fun - the best (and I guess only) good new Broadway musical of the season - and with the exception of the first act closer, the overlong Carnivale song in the second act, it was never really boring - even if nothing was really ever at stake plotwise. I had a surprisingly good time, and managed to enjoy the show - warts and all. I won't feel too bad about rooting for it come Tony time.
I also saw "Rafta, Rafta," the winner of this year's Olivier Award for Best Comedy, and which just started previews off-Broadway. I was pleasantly surprised by it. I found the first act a bit slow - it's starts out with the celebration after an Indian wedding (in Britain), and I felt sort of like an outsider watching other people have fun but not actually feeling a part of the action - but thing improved towards the end, and then the second act was much better. The show is about a young couple who get married, but they live with in the groom's parents' house, and so he has trouble keeping it up long enough to have sex with his wife, which obviously frustrates her. It's not all comedy - there are serious scenes too (call it a dramedy maybe). The best unintentional laugh (PLOT SPOILER here, if you care) was when after the couple does actually have successful intercourse near the end of the second act, the lights go out, and the guy behind me yells "Finally!" Then the lights come up again, and the parents are sitting in the kitchen, and the mother's line is something like "Did you hear something?" Biggest laugh of the night. It's my new favorite audience comment moment (the previous was at "New Century," when Mr. Charles is talking about how no one was surprised when Ian McKellen said he was gay, and the guy behind me yells out "Who's Ian McKellen?!") Anyway, I think this one's worthwhile. Oh, and the set is mighty impressive - especially for an off-Broadway production. At least twice the number of cast members as in "Glory Days," a better set, and all at a fraction of the price. Just saying.
And I suppose I need to throw in a mention for "Deep Trance Behavior in Potatoland," the latest of Richard Foreman play. This was my sixth Foreman play. As usually, I was pretty much totally baffled, but at least it was only a little over an hour long, and it was actually sort of amusing - in that it looks like your typical totally bizarre and over-the-top, low budget, avant-garde production. One of these days I'll understand his work. One of these days....
