0 "The Robber Bridegroom" Bluegrass Musical Returns

Greensboro College Theatre poster for current production - note the silhouettes in the design
Illustrations either side by Barry Moser for the 1987 edition of Eudora Welty's book

"... A charming bridegroom by day and a suave robber by night. Rosamund is the poor little rich girl who loves him. Salome is the wicked stepmother who tries, and largely fails, to throw a wrench (and even a poisoned apple) into the works... If this sounds like the makings of a fairy tale, that’s because it is: a Grimm fairy tale, no less, adapted into a Southern Gothic classic by Eudora Welty before being turned into a manic bluegrass musical comedy...  Greensboro College is staging the rarely-performed musical adaptation of "The Robber Bridegroom..."

I'm going to squeak notice of this show onto the blog late today, even though tomorrow (Sunday, February 22) is the last day it's showing, because just the fact that this exists and is back in performance circulation is good fairy tale news! (And you can keep an eye out for it in future too.)

Yes. The musical is based on the Bluebeard-related fairy tale The Robber Bridegroom (more specifically, on Eudora Weltey's Southern Gothic novel, which was based on the fairy tale - text is HERE), and is comic, a little bawdy and full of bluegrass music. In other words, it's probably not quite would you would expect if you're familiar with the tale. (I've included a number of different posters for the musical, along with the current one, to give you a better idea of the tone.)

In case you've never heard of the musical version you should know this is considered quite a unique, though oft-forgotten, masterful work, among musical theater folk. It helped launch the careers of Kevin Kline, Patty LuPone and Barry Bostwick (the latter earning a Tony that season for Leading Actor in a musical).

From some older productions here's a cobbling together of some different summaries to give you an idea of the show:

Set in eighteenth-century Mississippi, the show follows Jamie Lockhart, a rascally robber of the woods, as he courts Rosamund, the only daughter of the richest planter in the country. The proceedings go awry, however, thanks to a case of double-mistaken identity. Throw in an evil stepmother intent on Rosamund's demise, her pea-brained henchman, and a hostile talking head-in-a-trunk, and you have a rollicking country romp.It has one foot in the Southern Gothic tradition, the other in a fairy tale, and an arm gleefully waving about in comedy. 

The music is one of the only genuine bluegrass scores ever heard in a Broadway musical: challenging fiddle melodies that twist, turn, and gather velocity like a hare escaping a panther, only to slide back down into the warmth of a quiet Southern night. With its distinct sound, colorful cast, and unique form of storytelling, "The Robber Bridegroom" is a hidden gem!

In case you have this evening free and are in the area, here's the information on the tickets:you can get more information on the times and tickets HERE. 

From the Greensboro Theatre press release: 

"The Robber Bridegroom"'s book and lyrics were written by Alfred Uhury, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of "Driving Miss Daisy," and were based on a 1942 novella by Eudora Welty. Music is by Robert Waldman. Opening on Broadway in 1975, this rousing, bawdy Southern fairytale has gone on to become a regional favorite. As Broadway historian Peter Filichia puts it, "This is a favorite show of many people who hate musicals, because it eschews the more obvious conventions and has no trouble being its unpretentious self."

The Robber Bridegroom, small illustration by Walter Crane from Household Stories by The Brothers Grimm

Sources: HERE, HERE & HERE.

Fairy Tale Bonus of the Day:

Here's a link to the full background and analysis of the musical The Robber Bridegroom, by Scott Miller. It's quite lengthy but very readable and extremely fascinating, asking all sorts of great questions about men and women, relationships and how we view sex. With regard to current pop culture fascinations, specifically, 50 Shades of Grey, and Bluebeard tendencies to continuously rear their head, no matter how modernized, liberated and equal opportunity we believe ourselves to be, this is a good article to reference. Why? Because this is exactly what the musical is all about. The manner of the telling, with a large dose of tongue in cheek and folklore flavor, actually makes the material easier to consider and discuss. So if you're interested in Bluebeard, check out the article. You won't be disappointed. 

You can click HERE to read it.

Detail: "The Robber Bridegroom" Bluegrass Musical Returns

0 Something "Wicked" This Way Comes... (Finally!)

Wicked the movie (based on the musical, not the book) is on the way!

Let's get the facts straightthough: "in-the-works" is "in development". That does NOT mean "greenlit". It means they want to do it - heck, lots of people want to do it and there's some money being spent - BUT they're still trying to see if they can make it happen and are at the idea stage (of successfully translating the musical to the big screen).

When Producer Marc Platt was talking to Film Divider he confirmed the film was definitely "in development" with a first-pass script being written and a soft goal of a 2016 release. The production companies for the film are Marc Platt Productions and Universal Pictures.

Here are the relevant quotes from the interview at which the news was revealed:

The most famous (and possibly beloved) cast of Wicked The Musical.
Casting have some big shoes to fill!

It’s a loose goal. But the bar is very high for the creators of Wicked. Our show is still so strong everywhere, and we just set a record in both London and Edinburgh last week, and in Los Angeles, and we did on Broadway. Audiences enjoy that show so much that we are intending to move forward on the movie but aren’t going to do so until we’re satisfied in the material we have as a screenplay, and that the film will be every bit as satisfying as what we have on the stage. 

Who’s been writing it?Winnie Holzman. 

And what shape is her script in now?She’s just writing it now. 

And do you have a director at the moment?It’s Stephen Daldry. He’s been on for a year or two. But it’s in process. 2016 is the goal, but I don’t know whether we’ll make that goal or not. We will make the movie, but like I said, the bar is really high. We’re going to scrutinise our work on the screenplay and our prep on the movie, and when we feel like it’s ready, okay. We’re not going to shoot a release date is what I’m saying. It’s in the works, it’s not in a rush.

This movie is a no-brainer fan-draw. No matter what trends are happening, from misunderstood villains to Oz tributes to nothing-at-all-to-do-with-any-of-these, this movie has a guaranteed built-in audience who have been dying to see it for YEARS.

If you're one of them, just be warned it could still be quite a ways off. 2016 is only next year and that's a LOT of work to get done to get a film release-ready from it's current state by December 31st!

In the meantime, let the dream casting begin! (Or, continue...)

Sources: Here, here, here & here

Detail: Something "Wicked" This Way Comes... (Finally!)

0 Sondheim on Bettlelheim, and Lapine on Narrators

So Into The Woods didn't snag any of the awards they were nominated for at The Golden Globes on the weekend, but the movie (and fairy tales) are still very much being discussed, especially as the cast (and media) continue to promote the various overseas releases.

I keep seeing references to Sondheim and Lapine using Bettelheim's philosophy when writing Into The Woods, (as in the original musical, which they both then adapted for the Disney movie), however it's not quite as black and white as that. 

We'll start with a summary so you have a better idea of the thought processes behind the writing of ITW, from an interview with Edward Seckerson, published by Stage and Screen Online in 2006. It seems to make it pretty clear the pair were anti-Bettelheim, but as I said, it's not so straight forward so keep reading:

Sondheim: "[W]e took a Jungian approach. You know, this whole thing about how we based it on Bruno Bettelheim is nonsense — it’s nothing to do with Bettelheim. In fact, I don’t know if James read the book, I didn’t." 

And when Sondheim was interviewed by James Lipton for the TV series Inside the Actors Studio, Lipton brought up Bettelheim: "There seems to be a philosophical war in that musical between the theories of Bruno Bettelheim and Jung." 

Sondheim responded, "It’s interesting you say that. Everybody assumes we were influenced by Bruno Bettelheim. But if there’s any outside influence, it’s Jung. James is interested in Jung—Twelve Dreams is based on a case Jung wrote about. In fact, we spoke to a Jungian analyst about fairy tales."

And from Sondheim's book, "Look, I Made a Hat" comes the following quoted paragraph:

"And, ah, the woods. The all-purpose symbol of the unconscious, the womb, the past, the dark place where we face our trials and emerge wiser or destroyed, a major theme in Bruno Bettelheim's The Uses of Enchantment, which is the book everyone assumes we used as a source, simply because it's the only book on the subject known to a wide public. But Bettelheim's insistent point was that children would find fairy tales useful in part because the young protagonists' tribulations always resulted in triumph, the happily ever after. What interested James was the little dishonesties that enabled the characters to reach their happy endings. 

... James was also skeptical about the possibility of 'happily ever after' in real life and wary of the danger that fairy tales give children false expectations. As his play Twelve Dreams has demonstrated, he was drawn not to Bettelheim's Freudian approach but to Carl Jung's theory that fairy tales are an indication of the collective unconscious, something with which Bettelheim would be unlikely to agree. James and I talked about the fairy tales with a Jungian psychiatrist and discovered that with the exception of 'Jack and the Beanstalk,' which apparently is native only to the British Isles, the tales we were dealing with exist in virtually every culture in the world, especially the Cinderella story. African, Chinese, Native American - there is even a contemporary Hebrew version in which Cinderella wants to dance at the Tel Aviv Hilton." 

So the answer is more like "No, they didn't base it on Bettelheim's ideas" but also "those ideas weren't exactly ignored either."

OK, that's all good then, but here's the thing that bothers me, personally, though: Lapine (who wrote the "book" for the musical, as well as co-wrote the screenplay for the current Disney movie adaptation), is reported by Performing Arts Journal in 1988 as saying this (emphasis in bold is mine):

"The Narrator is what the fairy tale is about. I tried telling the stories without a narrator and it just doesn't work. A story needs a storyteller, and the storyteller is the ultimate figure of authority. Originally we wanted a public figure, not an actor, to play the Narrator: Walter Cronkite, or Tip O'Neill—someone who disseminated information and points of view. Then when we got rid of him you would see that the news was now being reported by the newsmakers, not the news reporter; decisions were being made by the people, not the politicians. Ultimately, we defined our narrator as a kind of intellectual, a Bettelheim figure; I wanted to get rid of Bettelheim!"

If this is the case, why was the Narrator's pivotal role so greatly downgraded in the movie? It makes a huge difference not having The Baker's father as the Narrator (especially as we then lose the impact of the change of POV in story telling when he's removed). Having The Baker be the Narrator all along didn't work quite like the bookend I (now) believe it was intended to be (as in, he was telling this whole story to his child.) When watching the movie I was a little confused as to why the Baker was telling us all of this in the first place, the WAY he was telling it (especially how the telling started, then ended...). 

A last but important note: I want to be clear on one point. I am in favor of the movie, in general. I fully expected it to miss the mark - widely - but the material is more faithful than I expected too. The fact that it uses fairy tales at its center is actually what helps transcend the things that bother me about the movie. What fairy tales are, how they live in people's minds, how the stories communicate and pass themselves on, is what does it. The stories themselves, and all the history they bring with them, the social legacies and various personal contexts etc work to overcome the movie's shortcomings, simply because their essential forms (wonder stories/Märchen) are kept intact. The beauty of certain iconic images (created by Rob Marshall et al) and catchy, beautiful tunes that remind us of certain story phrases, support this too. Everything else is peripheral and people can take what they want to (or need to) from the movie as a result. It's kind of magical in a way.

So there you go - my two cents for the day. ;)

Additional sources: "Look, I Made A Hat" & HERE. All movie screencaps created by Turn the Right Corner. Go HERE to see many more.

Detail: Sondheim on Bettlelheim, and Lapine on Narrators

0 Tally-ho! It's "Galavant"! (Finally) Huzzah!

Tomorrow. It's finally happening.

Galavant has taken his time getting onto our screens (I was blogging about his imminent arrival in the middle of last year), but this is for good reason/s (I'm led to believe) and both the critical and pop culture buzzes are excellent.

If you're newand are wondering "What be this Galavant?" (imagine I used an Olde English font there, would you?), here's a brief low-down:

Once upon a time, the dashing hero, Galavant (Joshua Sasse) lost the love of his life, Madalena (Mallory Jansen), to the evil King Richard (Timothy Omundson). Now, our fallen hero is ready to take revenge and restore his “happily ever after.” But it won’t be without a few twists and turns (and random show stoppers) along the way. 

Insert your own snarky caption here...

Galavant's creators have quite the pedigree, which if the premise worries you at all, should give you a reason to consider taking a peek at this one. Here's the promo list from the official website:

Screenwriter/executive producer Dan Fogelman (Crazy, Stupid, Love, Tangled, Cars) teams up with Broadway and Hollywood award-winning musical team -- composer Alan Menken (The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast) and lyricist Glenn Slater (Tangled) -- for a 4-week comedy extravaganza. 

They've already managed to attract some celebrity guest stars too (John Stamos, Weird Al, Ricky Gervais), which is almost unheard of on a new series. And then there's this aspect that has me looking forward to it very much as well:

"... we shot it in real, practical locations, as opposed to shooting on sound stages and sets; we went and shot it in England in real castles and real fields. And we had the costume designers from Downton Abbey so even though it's a silly comedy and sometimes people are breaking into song, it is the real thing." ~ creator Dan Fogelman (source)

If you like Monty Python, The Princess Bride, Once Upon A Mattress and musical comedy that doesn't take itself at all seriously with toe-tapping tunes, then Galavant is for you - for us! It's a very ambitious project which is likely to either shine or flop at each point of it's journey.

The Main cast, supported by hundreds of other excellent and silly people

I have my fingers crossed for their success. Mainstream storytelling has been so serious for so long, that despite some of it being excellent, we're incredibly overdue for some smart and fun series to inspire us and the next generation (and perhaps remind us to laugh at ourselves every once in a while).

The mini-series/limited run/whatever you want to call it, is designed, ABC programming-wise, to fill the gap during Once Upon A Time's lengthy hiatus, and it might well do the trick. Or, if it's as good as it looks like it might be, Once Upon A Time is going to have a hard act to follow for the second half of their season with the (now-banished from Storybrooke) Rumple and the trio of wicked women (Ursula, Maleficent and Cruella)!

Take a look at the animated sing-along lyrics for a taste of the style and audience "participation" the cast and crew are hoping for:

And here's one of the best promos for any new show that I've seen in a while (and yes, this is an official one):

What are you waiting for? Go set your alarm clocks (or DVRs) and get ready to find yourself humming tunes and snatches of ridiculous/hilarious lyrics in inappropriate places... ;)

Detail: Tally-ho! It's "Galavant"! (Finally) Huzzah!

0 Disney's "Into The Woo.., er, HEAs" (Possible Spoilers, Except You Expected This)

All illustrations in this post are by Hudson Talbott for his adaptation of an Into The Woods picture book

Rapunzel Lives! The Wolf is Not a Lech! The Baker's Wife is Not Unfaithful! HAEs for Everybody!

Wait.

What was the point of "Into The Woods" again?

It's taken me a few days to figure out just want I want to say about this news but my thoughts on the matter have basically stayed the same, because, be honest: I expected it. Heck, you expected it. You (and I) really, really, REALLY hoped it wouldn't happen, but it did. The edgy musical favorite, Into the Woods, which turns the popular view of fairy tales on its head by taking a gritty look at some very real consequences of fairy tale actions (in Act II), has been Disneyfied, or in fancier terms:

(The) more subversive elements of the Brothers Grimm-themed story (have) been excised by studio chiefs. 

"You will find in the movie that Rapunzel does not get killed, and the Prince does not sleep with the [Baker's Wife]," (Sondheim) told an audience of drama teachers at Sardi's restaurant in New York, also noting that Disney had objected to the sexualisation of the relationship between Little Red Riding Hood and the wolf. Added Sondheim: "Disney said, we don't want Rapunzel to die, so we replotted it. I won't tell you what happens, but we wrote a new song to cover it."

While James Lapine, (original Into The Woods writer) reportedly argued against the rewrites with Disney (but lost the battle) Stephen Sondheim (original composer/lyricist for Into the Woods) has defended the changes (from HERE):

Sondheim said teachers had a duty to explain to their students that creative licence could be undermined by social conservatism. "[You] have to explain to them that censorship is part of our puritanical ethics, and it's something that they're going to have to deal with," he said. "There has to be a point at which you don't compromise anymore, but that may mean that you won't get anyone to sell your painting or perform your musical. You have to deal with reality."

Translation: To Sondheim, it was worth the money to let Disney "Disneyfy" it. He wanted to get paid.

Ya know, I get that. We all gotta eat.

BUT.

It's INTO THE WOODS! aka the Disney-fication-antidote!

-strangle-sounds-

At least we've been warned.

Will it hurt box office? Unlikely. At least not for opening weekend.

Because, in the end, again in the spirit of being honest, the original Sondheim/Lapine team are still on this so there's still a chance it might be good, and you want to know how they dealt with it all, just as much as I do, don't you? DON'T YOU?!

Argh.

-headdesk-

Bonus Brain Stretcher for the day:
There's an interesting article from the Washington Post HERE about why Disney cannot tell grown-up stories. While there are some interesting points, and it makes a good argument for the predictable patterns in (current) Disney storytelling, I think it also makes it even clearer that society in general doesn't really understand the essence of simple timeless stories, or of fairy tales. Fairy tales in particular may be condensed, spare and even, in some ways, simplistic, but they are never "childish". And I have to agree with the author on this point (below):

There is big money in happy endings, ...and Disney can complicate its brand only so much.This is the same problem the company has in other areas, and the reason we hear so many complaints about a juvenile strain in popular media. If your brand relies on the idea that Captain America is a good, trustworthy person,you can only go so far in encouraging your audience to think critically about the implications of giving a single person the ability to do great violence. If you are in the business of selling happy endings, your customers might get less enthusiastic as they become convinced that “ever after” is not an ironclad guarantee.

Sources: HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE & HERE.

Detail: Disney's "Into The Woo.., er, HEAs" (Possible Spoilers, Except You Expected This)

0 OUAT: The Ice Queen (press release - no spoilers) & "GALAVANT" Is the Bridge For How We Get There (TRAILER ALERT!)

Hi Elsa! (And probably Anna too.) This is your official welcome by ABC to the world of Storybrooke, Maine and the Once Upon A Time fandom:

 

By the way, I've been seeing complaints (and occasionally outrage) that there are "so many people" getting upset that ABC is doing the Frozen version of Elsa instead of The Snow Queen. I just gotta say.... well that's interesting! (And it's not from me.) While I'd personally love to see a little traditional fairy tale Ice Maiden/Snow Queen input, it's pretty clear that OUAT's format and popularity relies upon using known fairy tale characters (usually, but not always, from the Disney canon) in order for the twists in their stories to have so much impact, so, of course it's going to be Elsa from Frozen. I'm very curious to know where all these "fairy tale hipsters"(their term, not mine) causing such a ruckus are from. Although I think it's a little misguided because of what the show essentially is, I kinda love that they're making fans of OUAT and Frozen take somewhat of a look at the old tales, even if it's only to note that they exist.

The other main beef on the interwebs today? That Dreamworks owns the Jack Frost character that a huge portion of the (various) fandoms want to 'ship with Elsa (who is Disney) - and the tears of despair that there is no way that can possibly happen because Dreamworks/Disney = mortal enemies. O.o

Elsa & Jack cosplay by Akatsuki Tsukasa
(click this to see more amazing cosplay including with Anna)

We're so far out from how they're going to manage this yet... I'm just going to say it: let it go, people!  (Don't kill me. )If you're a fan, odds are you will love what they do, if for no other reason than apparently the writer room is like a Frozen mini-fandom and cares just as much as you do. Chill. (And please don't kill me.)

Worried about how you're going to last that long? Enter Galavant (the musical comedy fairy tale show I've posted on HERE as being in development at Disney).

But before it gets too boring to keep reading, look! A crazy, fun, Princess-Bride-meets-Monty-Pythonesque trailer (but with less dirt) to show you we're very unlikely to be bored while we wait... From the writer of Crazy, Stupid, Love and Oscar-Winning Composer Alan Menken… ABC brings you… um, this:

This is so much better than expected. I'm heaving a huge sigh of relief. (And I'm going to take it as an excellent sign that my kid thought it was funny too.)

And yes, it makes complete sense that Galavant would be the bridge show for Oncers. We also know that this time they're not going to screw up the between season programming for this show either, after what happened with OUATinWonderland (for OUATinW it was a mid-season kafuffle, but still, cancellation is a serious price to pay for an oops).

So: fairy tale shows from ABC for the next year at the least. Woot!

(Note: Fairy tale writers: got an ice maiden or Jack Frost story bubbling away? This is the year to get it out there. Just sayin'.)

Detail: OUAT: The Ice Queen (press release - no spoilers) & "GALAVANT" Is the Bridge For How We Get There (TRAILER ALERT!)