At this moment in time composer Andrew Lloyd Webber is stating this is how 'Superstar' was always conceived and yet throughout the show's history both Lloyd Webber and Lyricist Tim Rice have openly stated that the album and arena tours only happened because no-one wanted to produce a stage musical of their work. It was only after the recording success of 'Jesus Christ Superstar' that it finally hit its intended location - the musical theatre stage, albeit in varying degrees of success. The original Broadway production, directed by Tom O'Horgan ran for two years although his psychedelic vision was rather jarring and, some would say, ahead of its time. Lloyd Webber especially loathed the production. Various international productions followed until in 1972 'Superstar' opened in London directed by Jim Sharman who brought aspects of his previous Australian concert and theatrical stagings into the mix to produce a show that would run eight years. Simplicity ruled over excess and even the two cast recordings, Broadway and London echo this (Lloyd Webber and Rice had no involvement of the former whilst they produced the latter, and it is audible).
On the original 1970 album and on those early cast recordings you can hear the full wonder of Lloyd Webber's orchestration (although Hershey Kay adapted them for Broadway). Over the years those orchestrations have been down-graded from a near 30 piece orchestra/rock band to a 10 piece band - and that's one of the crimes of this new arena production. So much so that there is little variety in the sound produced by the band, especially since virtually everything is played at one single volume; loud and with seemingly little regard for tempo variation. In fact the whole musical direction lacks variety lacking any real light or shade.
As for the concept and direction of Laurence Connor I can only say that it is at times odd, cliched in some aspects and the concept is jarring with many of the lyrics that are sung. The choices he makes from one scene to the next do not always unify, thereby creating something of a jumbled way of story telling, rather than following a conceptual through-line that adequately works.
I also cannot understand why a random line or two of dialogue was added which added nothing to the story (were these authorised by Tim Rice?). There were also things going on which didn't need to be, detracting from the music and lyrics and primary story telling (when there was a momentary coherent moment of it) such as during 'Peter's Denial' where we have 'Peter' and 'Mary' and the three denial witnesses supplemented by at least three ensemble members performing acrobatics and skateboarding in the background. To what purpose? Beats me.
Which reminds me; when I heard that they would be using parkour in the production I was intrigued. I was greatly disappointed to find that it only really consisted of the same repeated somersaults and cartwheels amongst otherwise run-of-the-mill choreography. Perhaps there is really little that could be done on a set , by Mark Fisher, that consisted primarily of one giant staircase (reminiscent of the finale of 'Carrie' in 1988). The remainder of the modern day, protest/political concept seemed to me to have been an extreme development of some of the concept that Gale Edwards touched upon in her revised 1998 UK tour (and subsequently filmed for the 2000 video release and produced on Broadway) - indeed the stairway reminded me of elements of the design for that earlier production. The costume design was incredibly boring and tired - far too cliched and dated ('Rent' cast-offs galore) with every other cast member having dreadlocks - do they all share the same hairdresser? The whole visual concept was just far too obvious and 'been-there-done-that'. The use of screens, whilst at times helpful to those seated further back, was perhaps over-used in a vain attempt to help clarify the plot - that should have been done otherwise. For me the best moment was 'Judas' Death' which worked very well.
Having 'Herod' as a talk show host served no real purpose other than, perhaps, highlighting the idea that in the case of 'Jesus' the people have the power (in this case via text), although Chris Moyles was evidently more concerned about soaking up the adulation more than being a part of a company attempting to tell a story. It was during his number that a hideous choice was made where Moyles rushed off-stage to be replaced by an obvious double who performed back flips before Moyles rushed back on to continue. Again utterly pointless.
The idea of having the 'Priests' as bankers(?) was an odd one as surely they should have been played as MPs? I actually laughed when 'Caiaphas' sung the line 'Our expenses are good' because, unexpectedly, MPs are the first thing that shot into my mind. It's always good to try and think outside the box but these concepts just didn't work for the piece - they were heavily shoe-horned in and in an incomplete state; 'follow the twelve' is displayed prominently throughout and yet I kept asking myself, which twelve? We are never shown the twelve Apostles themselves - we eventually work out which ones are 'Peter and 'Simon' simply because they have solo parts - but the remainder (Judas aside, obviously) were just part of a mass of men and women who were always together, even at the 'Last Supper'.
'Pilate' (Alex Hanson) as Judge was probably the most appropriate choice made in this 'update' of the show although even some of his choices (dictated by the story) are at odds with today's modern world - what Western civilisation would openly and publicly flog a prisoner before condemning him to death? Hanson's portrayal was a highlight of the show. His was a more is less take which upstaged many of the larger-than-life aspects of the production.
Story-wise there was little development in any character's journey; Jesus abruptly goes from being quite jubilant up to 'Simon Zealotes' to suddenly being downbeat for pretty much the rest of the show - there is no graduation. 'Judas' is presented as starting out as he means to go along - angry and pissed off - with no change along the way. 'Mary' serves very little purpose, save to look somewhat knowing. We are just presented with music and words and visuals which didn't necessarily compliment each other rather than a story complete with faceted characters with varying agendas.
It is clear that when modernising a story that is as old as this one there is a limit to how far a director can go, and in this case Laurence Connor went too far.
The lighting by Patrick Woodroffe is suitably rock concert orientated and I think that is symptomatic of this production: It is trying to be both a rock concert and a theatrical presentation. I believe it is possible to do both to varying success (hell, 'Notre Dame De Paris succeeded far superior than this) but there are too many missteps here to say that it gelled as a whole. It simply didn't; here was the odd occasion that worked as a theatrical, almost dramatic presentation, and there were many more that were rock spectacle; the guitar soloist during the introduction for 'Damned For All Time' for one. Again, utterly pointless in the storytelling.
I'll say here that the cast were all pretty good, the ensemble were strong singers and even Mel C as 'Mary' was better than expected, though her voice isn't particularly to my liking (nor her horrible costume and dread locked hair) and she isn't up there with Yvonne Elliman, Dana Gillespie or Anne-Marie David. Like most of the cast, Melanie Chisholm's acting was too large and flat to truly register any emotion (I do blame the director for these choices) and, Ben Forster as 'Jesus' suffered the same fate at times, though he came to life during 'Gethsemane'. Whilst He can certainly sing the role he is no Steve Balsamo who redefined the role in the 1996 London revival - and that is part of the issue with this role: Ian Gillan originated the role on the album and Jeff Fenholt copied his vocal performance almost note for note on tour and on Broadway. Ted Neeley who played the role on the silver screen put his own twist to the vocals and his was the performance to copy. Then Balsamo came along and totally reinvented the vocal part and ever since people have tried to copy him note for note - Glenn Carter certainly attempted to do so on Broadway and on the 2000 film, but his voice was thin and weak in comparison. Forster has much more power than Carter but the fact that his vocal choices were made by someone else robs him of the chance to truly own the role. Tim Minchin as 'Judas' is certainly the most successful of the leads. His is not so flat a performance, being able to express visually and vocally more than others do, which makes me wonder why he is able to do it and others aren't. Of course, the role is the most complex in the show and his voice, albeit different to what one would expect for the role, is quite suited. I only wish the cast were given more chance to actually act and create three-dimensional aspects to the characters they play in a production worthy of them rather than the flat, almost paint-by-numbers parts they have here in a production which is not.
If I imagine this as a rock concert with some (random) visuals it would be fine but since they were obviously trying to perform dramatically then it missed as much as it hit and considering Lloyd Webber kept mentioning in publicity the original 1971 American arena tours I wish he had just done that - ORCHESTRA (Oh! how I missed the orchestra!) and rock band, singers (no fancy costumes or staging) and mic stands. Da-Dah! Let the score speak for itself. Failing that, a fully fledged theatrical tour. And why not a revival of the 1996 London production which, since the design by John Napier was in the style of an Amphitheatre, could surely have been adapted for an arena stage?
Last words: The best thing to come from this production is that it has made me revisit the original album and the early cast recordings, if only to hear decent orchestrations and singers who, through vocals alone, without need for an in-your-face visual can tell the greatest story ever told.
hmmm think I'm going to give this a miss. I don't think I've heard one good review.... unless they're giving away free tickets like they did at the 02.
ReplyDelete