Theater: Natasha, Pierre, and the Great Comet of 1812--Tolstoy and Ritalin
Have you ever been to Chuck-E-Cheese? In these circles of hell, there are so many hyperkinetic kids, loud music playing from different corners, and flashing lights that the adult brain either overloads or involutes. This is what parts of the new Broadway musical Natasha, Pierre, and the Great Comet of 1812 are like. Combine that with mediocre music poorly aligned with a trivial subplot from War and Peace and you have a bad night at the theater.
Natasha is based on a silly subplot from Tolstoy's novel, trivially involving several young people meeting, trying to elope, being thwarted by elders, etc. There are doubtless reasons why the novel is a landmark, but this episode is not one of them. There is much direct quoting from Tolstoy, but the resultant lyrics are pedestrian, matching the overall plot. Perhaps seeking to amplify the sacred text, the composer made the whole thing through-sung, i.e. no spoken dialogue except for rare special effects. This overuse of recitative made it a long evening. There were only two songs (arias) in the entire 2 1/2 hours, both for pop star Josh Groban, wearing a beard and fat suit for this role so he could be authentic as an alcoholic, neurotic pedant. Neither song was memorable. Ever since 1600, recitative has been used to advance plot quickly and to lead in the big arias (think Mozart, Bach Passions, most musicals). Too much of it gets old. Here, the recitative writing was unexciting, often unimaginatively accompanied (it doesn't help to have an instrument playing along with a bad tune), and frequently cadenced on a pop-style flourish, rather like the ending of a B grade song from Phantom of the Opera. The music attempted a mash of pop, rock, a bit of hip-hop, disco, Fiddler on the Roof, Les Mis, and folk--OK as a concept, but not well executed here, and often too frenetic, like someone read War and Peace while high on Ritalin and listening to five separate radio channels simultaneously, as Data used to do in Star Trek Next Generation. Cliches abounded. For example, when the composer ran out of ideas, he took the familiar (from operas of the 1800's) out of adding a Gypsy-style dance ensemble. Stephen Sondheim has shown us that through-sung shows, when matched with convincing lyrics and well written music, can be compelling (Sweeney Todd). But not here.
The main problem here is that single author-creator-composer-lyricist Dave Malloy failed to answer the fundamental question that must be answered in all musicals and operas: Why are these people singing? While the characters were dressed up to look like 1812 Russians, the music largely had nothing to do with Russia, and never led to satisfying climaxes or amplification of impassioned text. The composer only knew to make things louder and higher in the voice range when he wanted more emotion. This is great for "Un bel di" in Madama Butterfly and "Climb Every Mountain" in The Sound of Music, but now overdone, and just lame if not matched by music of high quality harmony, melody, and rhythm. Sadly, I just found the whole thing dull. Too bad, given the amazing set, in which the theater had been expensively rebuilt with a sinuous, undulating thrust stage, pocketed with instrumentalists and little groups of audience members at small tables. The multilevels and snakelike shape of the stage is wonderful for any kind of fantasy play--I would imagine A Midsummer Night's Dream or Faust would really work on this set. Yet another great idea not so well matched to the story at hand about aristocrats having illicit affairs.
Overall, this play showed that cool, showy concepts do not make a musical. You need good music, good words, a good book, and tight integration of all three. Maybe that is what should have been in place in Natasha before spending the millions to put together this Broadway production.
Natasha is based on a silly subplot from Tolstoy's novel, trivially involving several young people meeting, trying to elope, being thwarted by elders, etc. There are doubtless reasons why the novel is a landmark, but this episode is not one of them. There is much direct quoting from Tolstoy, but the resultant lyrics are pedestrian, matching the overall plot. Perhaps seeking to amplify the sacred text, the composer made the whole thing through-sung, i.e. no spoken dialogue except for rare special effects. This overuse of recitative made it a long evening. There were only two songs (arias) in the entire 2 1/2 hours, both for pop star Josh Groban, wearing a beard and fat suit for this role so he could be authentic as an alcoholic, neurotic pedant. Neither song was memorable. Ever since 1600, recitative has been used to advance plot quickly and to lead in the big arias (think Mozart, Bach Passions, most musicals). Too much of it gets old. Here, the recitative writing was unexciting, often unimaginatively accompanied (it doesn't help to have an instrument playing along with a bad tune), and frequently cadenced on a pop-style flourish, rather like the ending of a B grade song from Phantom of the Opera. The music attempted a mash of pop, rock, a bit of hip-hop, disco, Fiddler on the Roof, Les Mis, and folk--OK as a concept, but not well executed here, and often too frenetic, like someone read War and Peace while high on Ritalin and listening to five separate radio channels simultaneously, as Data used to do in Star Trek Next Generation. Cliches abounded. For example, when the composer ran out of ideas, he took the familiar (from operas of the 1800's) out of adding a Gypsy-style dance ensemble. Stephen Sondheim has shown us that through-sung shows, when matched with convincing lyrics and well written music, can be compelling (Sweeney Todd). But not here.
The main problem here is that single author-creator-composer-lyricist Dave Malloy failed to answer the fundamental question that must be answered in all musicals and operas: Why are these people singing? While the characters were dressed up to look like 1812 Russians, the music largely had nothing to do with Russia, and never led to satisfying climaxes or amplification of impassioned text. The composer only knew to make things louder and higher in the voice range when he wanted more emotion. This is great for "Un bel di" in Madama Butterfly and "Climb Every Mountain" in The Sound of Music, but now overdone, and just lame if not matched by music of high quality harmony, melody, and rhythm. Sadly, I just found the whole thing dull. Too bad, given the amazing set, in which the theater had been expensively rebuilt with a sinuous, undulating thrust stage, pocketed with instrumentalists and little groups of audience members at small tables. The multilevels and snakelike shape of the stage is wonderful for any kind of fantasy play--I would imagine A Midsummer Night's Dream or Faust would really work on this set. Yet another great idea not so well matched to the story at hand about aristocrats having illicit affairs.
Overall, this play showed that cool, showy concepts do not make a musical. You need good music, good words, a good book, and tight integration of all three. Maybe that is what should have been in place in Natasha before spending the millions to put together this Broadway production.
Comments
Post a Comment