01/29/2007
On Broadway: Spring Awakening
Those of you looking for something different on Broadway may want to check out Spring Awakening. I had the opportunity to catch this show last week and wasn't really sure what to expect. And I left the theater still trying to figure out exactly what I had just seen, which in this case is a good thing.
The show is a meditation on the struggles of adolescence and the disconnect between children at the age of burgeoning sexuality and parents who aren't quite ready to unlock the secrets of that world for them yet. And the troubling disconnect is the place from which all the drama of this exuberant show springs.
It's a little bit Rent, a little bit History Boys. It's set in the 1890's in Germany (based on an 1891 play by Frank Wedekind that was banned for nearly 100 years) and deals with first love, masturbation, suicide, homosexuality, and growing up. The musical score by Duncan Sheik is angsty, raucous, melancholy, and with numbers like "Totally Fucked", amusingly irreverent.
There are only two adults in the entire cast, played by Christine Estabrook and Stephen Spinella. It's great to see a young cast on Broadway being allowed to really take on adult themes. John Gallagher, Jr., who plays the ne'er do well, misunderstood Moritz (and starts the clip above 'The Bitch of Living'), is the cast's standout.
If there's any gripe I have with the show, it's that I wish some of the more minor characters had their stories brought out more at the expense of the romantic leads, whom I found far less interesting than some of their co-stars. Also, there are a few tragic plot points that are resolved too conveniently for such a mature production. The story is rendered in such broad strokes that it's hard to feel intimate with any of the characters. As a coming-of-age rock opera, however, it succeeds on a purely musical level.
Upon reading the Playbill I counted nearly 30 producers. When this show makes it to the Tonys, as it should, we'll be waiting a long time for them to rattle off that list of names, which includes Tom Hulce and Maverick Records founder Freddy DeMann.
Spring Awakening is an engaging, often challenging, energized production that I found to be a breath of fresh air. I recommend it.
Sphere: Related ContentPosted 4:45 PM EST by Andy in New York, News, Theatre | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Actually going to see it tonight...
I saw it twice last year at the Atlantic Theater I saw the second preview and spent the intermission calling all my friends to get their hands on the 40.00 tickets before it opened and--as nearly all critics have already said---is one of the most exciting new musicals in a decade. BLOWS Grey Gardens out of the water. The music does not try to be a response to Sondheim or a echo to the past years of broadway.
The staging is brilliant and Bill T. Jones' choreography is thrilling.
And unlike Andy I loved the two leads.
The gay pedigree on this project is mindblowing.
This show is strong stuff and everyone of those 30 producers were needed cause the large size of the cast and the small theater would have made this project impossible to bring to Broadway.
Most thrilling, bold show to be seen.
Posted by: MCnNYC | Jan 29, 2007 5:18:32 PM
I love this show! And I'm very happy that you are recommending it here.
But I have two points of clarification:
1. The ages of the actors playing the "kids" range from 16 - 22, but most indeed are adults. (This is not a kiddy show.)
2. The reason for your perception of the story being told in "broad strokes" is because the original play is structure in a broad and episodic way. This is because the original playwright, Wedekind, was one of the first expressionist playwrights - this is an early work. In this version, the songs become the means for the kids to exprsss their thoughts and feelings in a repressive society.
And of course, the music rocks! And I too was very fond of the two leads!
Posted by: Pseudolus | Jan 29, 2007 5:31:18 PM
Well good for Duncan. I saw him at market days in Chicago two years ago and was embarassed for him and his sloppy lyrics. Looks like a winner to me.
Posted by: Mike | Jan 29, 2007 7:01:11 PM
I saw this play a week ago or so. I loved the set direction and the score. However, I too left feeling unfulfilled. I can't quite put my finger on what the issue was. I felt like too much time was spent on the two leads and they introduced issues with the co-stars and then dropped them altogether. I loved the music tho and it was visually beautiful. I'd recommend it.
Posted by: Derrick | Jan 29, 2007 9:19:57 PM
I agree that John Gallagher Jr. is the standout, but it is inspiring to see so many fresh faces on Broadway. The entire cast shares such raw talent and the music is so contagiously powerful that one can almost overlook some of the show's heavy material (if they really want/need to).
Posted by: Dave | Jan 29, 2007 10:57:31 PM
The show is my fave at the moment. I've been telling everyone about it since before I saw it last week. It's a show that has special-ness surrounding it.
The soundtrack gets better with each listen.
And, there are some hot moments and a few sexy sexy guys. The ones that are over 18, of course. I hope.
Posted by: Nicholas | Jan 29, 2007 11:39:49 PM
I also loved the show, it felt like the next step in the evolution of the American musical, totally reinvigorating the genre.
One point of clarification: Spinella and Estabrook are the only two adults in the cast, but they play multiple roles, each distinct and compelling, which is an achievement of its own. They play all the children's various parents, their teachers and others as well.
Posted by: David | Jan 29, 2007 11:45:56 PM
Oh finally! Some mention of Spring Awakening!
I walked out unsure (again, in a good way) but the more I've lingered about it and heard the cast recording the more I LOVE LOVE LOVE this show and now going to come back to NY later this month to see it again.
Totally something fresh, different and new (which is not always a good thing but in this case it definitely is) that just had an exciting vibe that you felt sitting there in the theatre.
Posted by: Vance | Jan 30, 2007 12:56:01 AM
Unfortunately I haven't been able to see the show yet... but I've had the pleasure of meeting Duncan Sheik on several occassions -- and he is one of the nicest, down-to-earth guys you'd ever want to meet. So glad for him and this project.
Posted by: k | Jan 30, 2007 2:00:19 AM
Andy
Have you been watching the View recently?? Because Rosie has been pushing this play non stop
Posted by: steve | Jan 30, 2007 3:18:53 AM
Yet another "musical for people who do not like musicals," a la Rent. The source material is interesting and the themes powerful but the producers brought too little theatricality to the production. If one is going to present an Expressionistic play then give it a full-blown Expressionistic production. This struck me as tepid with a few dirty words or mature themes for shock value. (Can anyone be shocked anymore?) But they were merely trotted out and not explored. I expect more from Broadway. Indeed, Spring Awakening is a "little bit" Rent and The History Boys but too little and the weakest parts of each. While it is always refreshing to see young talent emerge on Broadway, this production did precious little to showcase their talents. Jones' choreography is energetic if already trite. The songs do not rise to the level of the painfully mediocre Rent. Naked Boys Singing had more clever lyrics and a greater range of styles. For the next level in musicals I would look to The Light in the Piazza and for staging the magnificent revival of Company. If the producers are going to charge the now standard over one hundred dollars for admission, they ought to give more value than this just-above-workshop-level presentation. But differences of opinion make an audience, this is just mine.
Posted by: rudy | Jan 30, 2007 7:35:44 AM
i guess im going to have check it out!
Posted by: chris | Jan 30, 2007 8:25:32 AM
flip on a switch
and everything is fine
no more lips, no more tongue
no more ears, no more eyes
the naked blue angel appears through the blinds
disappears in the bloom of a mirror-blue night
but there's nowhere to hide
from these bones from my mind
it's broken inside,
i'm a man and a child
i'm at home with a ghost
who got left in the cold
and who knocks at my peace
with no keys to my soul
and the whispers of fear
the chill up the spine
the steel way too
with the flick of a light
the minute you do it,
the fingers so blind
you remove every bit
of the blue from your mind
but there's nowhere to hide
from the ghost in my mind
it's cold in these bones,
i'm a man and a child
there's no one who knows
there's no where to go
there's no one to see
who can see to my soul
Posted by: anon | Jan 30, 2007 9:39:13 AM
I saw the show a few weeks ago. While I did get caught up in the music and story, I felt sort of troubled that the gay characters are plaid for laughs and don't really get fleshed out. I realize that it's not their story, but they felt so two dimensional to me.
*SPOILER ALERT* Also, the "Totally Fucked" number that everyone seems to love was far too jarring for me, considering that it comes right after Morirtz's suicide. That laugh that comes when Melchior looks into the audience just creeped me out.
Again, I liked this show (even have gotten the soundtrack so I can listen to what I think is a great score) and I'm excited with it's quality and originality, but I think I'd like to know what the bookwriter/directors reasoning was for these choices.
Some might say that the laughs have to come from somewhere (Why can't a musical exist with out a laugh? Would audiences not tolerate it? If it's a compelling story told in an effective way, I think I would) or that it's great that the gay characters aren't all gloom and doom (Fine, but could the actors be directed to be a little more realistic or compelling in their portrayals) but I'm obviously not so sure that these really answer my questions.
Posted by: Timmy | Jan 30, 2007 11:01:23 AM
Actuallythought Light/Piazza music/set/staging and performances were mostly throughbacks and nothing forward at all.
It definitely does not resonate with a diverse audience and had a "pedigree" feeling. All played well with the "traditional" audience and indeed was sweet and sentimental. While COMPANY--if we want to talk about a 100 price tag..well I want an orchestra and real singers (Raul exempted here of course) and can we ask that they try to ACT!! the staging is merely a gimmick and saves money.
While the Awakening cast employs a large cast (how refreshing) and even has real strings that you can actually see onstage no less--in place of the ditial enhancements producers are demanding from composers and orchestrators these days. Where is the musicians in Grey Gardens anyway? Are they really playing?
And after seeing the production again last night...I have to mention the compelling contribution of Steven Spinella in this transfer.
And Timmy...I love that you were JARRED!
How exciting to hear.
And please...the lyrics of RENT is pop compared to the work here.
But that's just my opinion.
Posted by: MCnNYC | Jan 30, 2007 12:33:44 PM
Adding my thoughts for the record.
I saw this tonight and I generally liked it. The music (mostly), the staging, the lighting and pace were great as was the cast. I, too would have liked to explore/see more of the other players but on the whole I think it worked.
The Expressionistic style was refreshing and very often I felt like I did not know where to look first as there was so much going on, but it seemed to flow and come together.
One criticism for me would be the earnest of the music and some of the acting. It felt like there were moments when the message/point/idea of tension, loss. frustration etc..was conveyed but there were still 2 more songs on that point. I remember thinking that if I had been 22 when seeing this for the first time I would have jumped out of my skin w/excitment and change. Now, a bit beyond 22 - not so much. It still gets a B+
Posted by: hoya86 | Feb 14, 2007 11:16:59 PM