"Chess", English National Opera, London Coliseum, 31/5/18

For such a well-loved musical it is surprising that it has taken so long for a West End revival of Chess to materialise. Then again, given its endless revisions, perhaps it isn't such a wonder. But, finally, it has been revived, albeit in yet another version that aims to bring the material closer to its original source material - the concept album. To a great degree it succeeds and the fact that the orchestra of the English National Opera are involved ensures a rich musical sound.
Tim Rice has said that the addition of Walter de Courcey in the original stage production was an unnecessary complication and this new version in removing him does indeed feel more streamlined and uncomplicated. That said it is not a perfect production but it does hold so much promise.

Directed by Laurence Connor who also, presumably (as there is no credit given), created the new book. He does a competent job but his construction is a little stunted in the dialogue department, which tends to promote the necessary without any real flair. Connor even rewrites some of Rice's original dialogue unnecessarily. The blunt, sometimes abrupt, nature of the scenes also crosses to Connor's song placements and lyrical choices which are also a little questionable if we look at them for dramatic purposes and I wonder if this was an early issue given the production was billed as "semi-staged" even if the final product was far from "semi". But whatever the cause, these are elements that should be easily rectified should this production re-materialise at some point.
Connor's actual direction is serviceable and he does have some interesting staging ideas but he is certainly blessed to have a brilliant choreographer in Stephen Mear whose musical stagings are witty and intelligent and include the best staging of "Merano" I've seen. Perhaps Connor needs to learn to take more daring risks in his work.
Connor is also fortunate in the design of Matthew Kinley which is beautifully supplemented by the  extraordinary video designs of Terry Scruby. Kinley's is an abstract design upon which realistic fixtures are essayed and one wishes they had gone the whole hog with an abstract production, but Connor is clearly uncomfortable with this idea (much like Trevor Nunn in the original production) and has only one abstract sequence throughout. Patrick Woodroffe's lighting is also another element that brings further dimensions to Connor's sometimes stilted staging. Christina Cunningham's costumes perfectly represent that period of cross-over that existed between the 1970s and 80s though why so many of the male leads wore similar spectacles is a bit of a strange puzzle. Anders Eljas' ornate orchestrations, naturally, sound thrilling and the synth sounds are evocative of the period and come through brilliantly in Mick Potter's excellent sound design.

The ENO ensemble do a fine job in adjusting to a more non-operatic sound and it would be difficult to identify them amongst the veteran musical theatre performers though, surprisingly, the ensemble is not used as much as they could have been.
Michael Ball heads the cast as Russian Grand-master "Anatoly Sergievsky" and he does a fine job of portraying a man weary of the political machinations of his government. Ball also acts through the melodies and lyrics rather than just singing them though he is sometimes limited by static direction. As his wife, "Svetlana", Alexandra Burke offers a powerful, though somewhat breathy in the lower register, voice and peppers her moments with soulful trills which can be a trifle distracting. She emotes appropriately but is a little too big in the role. Connor should have advised her that sometimes less is more. Cedric Neal is a wonderful "Arbiter" with a stunning vocal performance and presence and Phillip Browne brings a threatening deep tone to the Soviet "Molokov". Browne's performance is appropriately mannered and charming but we also get moments where we see "Molokov" reveal his other aspects, notably during "The Soviet Machine". Tim Howar's "Freddie" is something of a revelation, despite Connor's clunky handling of the character. Howar's voice has the appropriate rock edge and easily handles some of the highest notes in musical theatre for a male. He is also charming and vulnerable in the role yet simultaneously dangerous. What was once the lead role of "Florence" is played here by Cassidy Janson who, unquestionably, brings a dynamic voice and presence to the role. Janson is also able to play "Florence" as hard and as soft as and when required and it's just unfortunate that the role comes across as lesser under Connor's hand. But when Janson is given those moments to shine, she blazes and none more so than with her duet with Burke, "I Know Him So Well".

A sometimes brilliant production, this new version of Chess is ultimately a flawed work - though not necessarily due to its original authors and whilst the new book certainly retains a simplicity it does feel a little pressed in bringing various plot-strands together at the very end. There are, however, moments of theatrical bliss but, sadly, also tepid staging in Laurence Connor's uneven direction which is inevitably salvaged by Stephen Mear's brilliant choreography and the work of the various designers. Still not perfect, but Chess is clearly on the right road to redemption.

"Chess", RCS, Edited Review For Backstage Pass

My review for the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland production of Chess (seen here) has been slightly edited and published on Backstage Pass:

http://www.backstagepass.biz/2017/03/theatre-review-chess-royal.html

Originally developed as a 1984 album Tim Rice, Benny Andersson and Björn Ulvaeus' musical Chess spawned several chart hits, including the number one single I Know Him So Well. It was later deconstructed, rewritten, hacked apart and re-staged in various forms by a variety of directors to the point that no two version of Chess have ever been the same. In 2008 Tim Rice presented a concert version at the Royal Albert Hall in an effort to present a version close to definitive.

The musical portrays the story of chess grand-masters Freddie Trumper and Anatoly Sergievsky, representing the U.S. and U.S.S.R. in the World Chess Championship, and the woman who comes between them, Florence Vassy, who works with the American but soon falls for the Russian player. The Cold War political undertones inform the various machinations of the plot but ultimately it is a story of doomed love.

Chess is oft cited as having a complex plot but this is not so, especially if the direction is precise and focused. But here a lack of clarity and a penchant for excessive staging muddies the storytelling despite the apparent need to spoon-feed the audience information at times. It's a rather chaotic production that lacks cohesion and Andrew Panton's direction is woefully misguided and it's apparent he does not understand the musical and has not listened to Rice's lyrics, which are integral to the storytelling. Panton's staging doesn't join the dots and there are some very questionable decisions which fail to serve the plot. Act II is especially chaotic and incoherent and there is also an obsession with onstage drinking and an excessive use of fog, which threatened to engulf the audience during I Know Him So Well. 
The choreography by Darragh O'Leary is serviceable  but there are many missed opportunities, including a rather unremarkable One Night In Bangkok and a rather staid Merchandisers. His most successful work is in the second chess game where the conflict between Freddie and Anatoly is truly put to the fore in dynamic fashion. 
Kenneth MacLeod's design is clumsily dwarfed by a central platform that causes some serious stall sight-line issues but is otherwise rather run-of-the-mill and uninspired with the upstage platform under-used, though the video screen design is a welcome variation, even if the graphics themselves are questionable. The costumes include some odd choices and appear as a random assemblage of 1980s stereotypical images; Corey Haim in The Lost Boys; Miami Vice; huge over-the-top bear-skin hats for the Russians; even adorning the ensemble of One Night In Bangkok as if they were in Liberace's gym - replete with gold tank tops and shorts. Indeed the costumes are rather unvaried in scenes causing a massive swathe of singular colour to overpower the stage. Among the most unusual costume choices are for the ensemble, presumably here meant to represent chess pieces, during the chess games where cumbersome head gear is sported, recalling the helmet of TV's Knightmare. 
The unrestrained lighting design by Grant Anderson is often also a hindrance to the audience's view, often blinding them, and it is regularly overpowering, though there are also successful moments and ideas as in The Deal. 
This presentation is based on the London version, using some of the more recent additions and revisions and whilst the musical direction is fine, other musical edits are undertaken and these are rather hit and miss serving no real purpose with many being cloddish, and where sung lines are spoken, devoid of underscore, these are often awkward. That said, it's always a joy to hear Chess with a full sized orchestra - including a full string section.

It is unfortunate that there are no believable character arcs in this production based on directorial choices but the cast rise above the limitations imposed upon them: 
The Arbiter of Emma Torrens is terribly under-used and appears as a visual merging of Sam Bailey and Ana Matronic. Though she is often rooted to one spot throughout the show her dynamic vocals punctuate the production with massive effect. 
Jamie Pritchard as Anatoly is a charismatic, attractive figure who has an interesting, if unusual, vocal technique and he serves the role well and, for the most part, creates a sympathetic character that appeals to the audience. 
Freddie is portrayed as an erratic drug addict - at least in Act I, since this vice disappears in Act II. This imposed addictive factor serves only to negate the principle that Freddie is an unpleasant character because of his intense focus, to the detriment of all else, on the game of chess and his childhood as revealed in Pity The Child. Here his addiction is the issue rendering his actions in the second act as without reason. Barney Wilkinson's voice is suited to the rock role and he is certainly a watchable Freddie. 
Walter and Molokov are rather unusual portrayals, with Walter, here played by Jacob Stein, being a rather unpleasant stereotype, complete with cowboy hat and cigar, whose singing part has been unwisely all but cut. Shane Convery's Molokov is likewise stunted by directorial choices, though he, at least, has more to do. 
Svetlana has little to do, aside from verging on histrionics, and is dressed rather extravagantly for a Russian woman from Soviet-era Russia, even the wife of the Russian chess champion. In the role, Hayley VerValin does her best with the little material she is given but it is unfortunate her solo, Someone Else's Story, does not employ the appropriate 1990 Australian rewrite lyrics which make more dramatic sense for her character. 
Florence has the most successful vocals of the production (Nobody's Side is the highlight of the show) though her character is again marred by direction; having her drunk during Mountain Duet, a scene where she is supposed to fall for the Russian, negates the sober choice she is meant to be making. That said, the fact that Florence and Anatoly have no physical contact during the number makes the scene, and Freddie's response to it, ultimately futile. But Daisy Ann Fletcher is certainly something of a powerhouse in the largest role in the show. 
The ensemble do well with what they are given though this often constitutes some of the most cartoon-like, comical stereotyping ever seen which only belittles the cast and the material they perform. The ensemble vocals during Act II fall apart somewhat with Bangkok often sounding akin to a cacophony but they are especially successful when they are portraying the Reporters, handling some of the most demanding musical material very well. 

Kudos must be given to the Royal Conservatoire for attempting this demanding show but, sadly, for the most part it is a misdirected effort laden with flaws filled with excesses worthy of a Tom O'Horgan production and it is unfortunate that the cast are let down by an unremarkable creative team who have created a production that is all too clumsy and clunky and not at all as elegant as the game of chess, and the musical of the same name, should be.

"Chess", Royal Conservatoire of Scotland (New Athenaeum Theatre), Glasgow, 18/3/17

Tim Rice, Benny Andersson and Björn Ulvaeus' musical Chess was originally developed as a 1984 album which spawned several chart hits, including the number one single I Know Him So Well. It's journey to the stage was the start of a turbulent journey where the musical was deconstructed, rewritten, hacked apart and re-staged in various forms by a variety of directors. So much so that no two version of Chess have ever been the same. In 2008 Tim Rice presented a concert version at the Royal Albert Hall in an effort to present a version close to definitive.

The musical portrays the story of chess grand-masters Freddie Trumper and Anatoly Sergievsky, representing the U.S. and U.S.S.R. in the World Chess Championship, and the woman who comes between them, Florence Vassy, who works with the American but soon falls for the Russian player. The Cold War political undertones inform the various machinations of the plot but ultimately it is a story of doomed love.

Kudos must be given to the Royal Conservatoire for attempting this most demanding show but, sadly, for the most part it is a misdirected effort laden with flaws and throughout there are excesses worthy of a Tom O'Horgan production.

Chess is oft cited as having a complex plot but this is not necessarily so, especially if the direction is precise and focused. But here a lack of clarity and a penchant for excessive staging muddies the storytelling despite the apparent need to spoon-feed the audience information at times, as when screens explain the lyrics 'S.R.O.' and Molokov's manila folder emblazoned with 'Classified' - despite the fact that the word should be in Russian. In comparison, other design elements are far too busy to be successful, as in the tops worn by the Merchandisers.

It's a rather chaotic production that lacks cohesion and Andrew Panton's direction is woefully misguided and it's clear he does not understand the musical and has not listened to Rice's lyrics, which are integral to the storytelling. Panton's staging doesn't appear to join the dots and there are some very questionable decisions which fail to serve the plot. Act II is especially chaotic and incoherent and there is also an obsession with onstage drinking and an excessive use of fog, which during I Know Him So Well threatened to engulf the audience.

The choreography by Darragh O'Leary is serviceable, as is most of the musical staging but there are many missed opportunities, including a rather unremarkable One Night In Bangkok and a rather staid Merchandisers. His most successful work is in the second chess game where the conflict between Freddie and Anatoly is truly put to the fore.

Kenneth MacLeod's design is clumsily dwarfed by a central platform that causes some serious stall sight-line issues throughout the show. Beyond that it is rather run-of-the-mill and uninspired and the upstage platform is under-utilised, though the video screen design is a welcome variation, even if the graphics themselves are questionable, often reminding one of an American action movie title design. The costumes include some odd choices and appear as a random assemblage of 1980s stereotypical images; dressing Freddie as Corey Haim in The Lost Boys in Act I and a Miami Vice wannabe in Act II, adorning the Russians in huge over-the-top bear-skin hats, huge-shouldered security figures (and I mean huge), adorning the ensemble of One Night In Bangkok as if they have arrived from Liberace's gym - replete with gold tank tops and shorts. Indeed the costumes in such numbers are rather unvaried causing a massive swathe of singular colour to overpower the staging. Among the most unusual costuming choices are the ensemble costumes, presumably meant to represent chess pieces, during the chess games where cumbersome head gear is sported, recalling the helmet of TV's Knightmare.

The excessive lighting design by Grant Anderson is also sometimes a hindrance to the audience's view, often blinding them, and it is often overpowering, though there are also successful moments and ideas as in The Deal.

This presentation is based on the London version, with some of the additions and revisions of the Royal Albert Hall concert and whilst the musical direction is fine, other musical edits (including removing some of the backing vocals and reply lines in songs) are undertaken and these are rather hit and miss serving no real purpose with many being clumsy and where sung lines are spoken, devoid of underscore, these are often clunky. That said, it's always a joy to hear Chess with a full sized orchestra (not "band" as shamefully described in the programme) including a full string section.

It is unfortunate that there are no clear character arcs in this production since any established scenic points are all but ignored by the director and his choices. But otherwise the cast rise above the limitations imposed upon them:

The Arbiter of Emma Torrens is terribly under-used and comes across as a visual merging of Sam Bailey and Ana Matronic. Though she is often rooted to one spot throughout the show her dynamic vocals punctuate the production with massive effect.

Jamie Pritchard as Anatoly is a charismatic, attractive figure who has an interesting, if unusual, vocal technique and he serves the role as best as is possible given the erratic direction and, for the most part, creates a sympathetic character that appeals to the audience.

Freddie is portrayed as an erratic, alcohol-swigging drug addict - at least in Act I, since these vices miraculously disappear in Act II. This imposed addictive factor serves only to negate the principle that Freddie is an unpleasant character because of his intense focus, to the detriment of all else - including his relationship with Florence - on the game of chess and his family history as revealed in Pity The Child. Here his addictions are the issue rendering his actions in the second act as without reason. Barney Wilkinson's voice is suited to the rock role and he is certainly a watchable Freddie.

Walter and Molokov are rather unusual portrayals, with Walter, here played by Jacob Stein, especially being a rather unpleasant stereotype, complete with cowboy hat and cigar, whose singing part has been unwisely all but cut. Shane Convery's Molokov is likewise stunted by directorial choices, though he, at least, has more to do.

Svetlana is given little to do, aside from occasionally verging on histrionics, and is dressed rather extravagantly for a Russian woman from Soviet-era Russia, even if that woman is the wife of the Russian chess champion. In the role, Hayley VerValin does her best with the little material she is given. It is also unfortunate that her one solo, Someone Else's Story, employ the original Broadway lyrics where the song was written for Florence, rather than the 1990 Australian rewrite where the song was assigned to Svetlana with suitable corrections, as this would make more dramatic sense for her character.

Florence has the most impressive vocals of the production (Nobody's Side is the highlight of the show) though her character is again marred by the direction; having her get drunk during Mountain Duet, a scene where she is supposed to fall for the Russian, negates the sober choice she is meant to be making. That said, the fact that Florence and Anatoly have no physical contact during the number makes the scene, and Freddie's response to it, ultimately futile. But Daisy Ann Fletcher is certainly something of a powerhouse in the largest role in the show.

The ensemble do well with what they are given though this often constitutes some of the most cartoon-like, comical stereotyping I've ever seen which only belittles the cast and the material they perform. The ensemble vocals during Act II fall apart somewhat with Bangkok often sounding akin to a cacophony but they are especially successful when they are portraying the Reporters, handling some of the most demanding musical material very well.

Chess is a most demanding show and it is unfortunate that the cast are let down by an unremarkable creative team who have created a production that is all too clumsy and clunky and not at all as elegant as the game of chess, and the musical of the same name, should be.

An edited version of this review was later published on Backstage Pass and can be read here: http://sharmanprince.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/chess-rcs-edited-review-for-backstage.html

'Chess The Musical', Aberystwyth Arts Centre, 13/8/11

I've said quite a bit about 'Chess' in previous posts but I'll admit I was excited to see a new production of probably my favourite musical.
I was aware that this production was vastly different to that that recently toured the UK and before I set foot into the auditorium I expected a leaner, darker production. I wasn't too far off the mark.

Director and choreographer Anthony Williams clearly aimed for clarity in his production and he largely succeeds. Whilst not all his choices were to my liking, nor his choreography exceptional, he has created a production that was more dramatic and emotionally honest than the UK tour.

Williams has adapted the book and includes new dialogue which I found surplus to requirements. Whilst they tend to reinforce the narrative they don't serve to drive the plot forward any more than the already existing text although the ad-libs by Tim Rogers as 'Freddie' are the most successful of the additions.

Rogers is part of a superb cast which also features Tom Solomon as 'Anatoly' and both male leads handle themselves assuredly although Rogers tends to outshine Solomon with his charisma (I had previously seen Rogers as 'The Man' in 'Whislte Down The Wind' but here I realised that he's not as tall as he seems, adding to his charm).

Stephen McCarthy is perfect as 'Walter' handling the greasy TV exec with ease. As his political opposite James Dinsmore plays 'Molokov' with a knowing glance and a higher vocal range than normally attributed to the part.

Leighton Rafferty's 'Arbiter' is at once cool, charismatic and unmovable and he is blessed with a strong, commanding presence and voice.

Lori Haley Fox plays 'Svetlana' and gives the character dignity and class and blesses her with a wonderful voice shown off in her solo 'Heaven Help My Heart', normally a song for 'Florence', which the audience lapped up.

As 'Florence' Julie Stark has the weight of the show on her shoulders but she carries it with such ease it's a joy to watch. Stark can sing gently and belt like the best of them. Hers was a performance that was pitched perfectly. 'Nobody's Side' and 'Someone Else's Story' were stirring moments; the former a powerhouse number, punched out effortlessly, whilst the latter was delivered gently but with assurance.

And both ladies sing 'I Know Him So Well' to such near-perfection that I have rarely heard it sung better.

The (primarily young) Ensemble also handles themselves well adding to the blend of wonderful voices this production is blessed with. Kudos to the casting; the cast fit wonderfully together and their voices blend together excellently.

There was something a little incongruous with the costume but the set design of sliding panels which meet to form chess piece silhouettes was elegant and simple. Projections were also used sparingly and to good effect with footage of 'Florence' and 'Freddie' during happier times being a brilliant and moving juxtaposition to the song 'Someone Else's Story'.

Musical direction is by Michael Morwood who also arranged the score for the six piece band and whilst I do miss the full orchestra the simpler arrangements do not detract from the music which is otherwise handled with skill by Morwood.

'Chess' is not a short musical and Williams should have worked on scene transitions a bit more to shorten the duration but this is only a peeve of mine and does not detract from the enjoyment of the show.

Aberystwyth Arts Centre has created an excellent production of a difficult show and they are blessed with a great cast, so if you get a chance do go and see it!

'Chess The Musical', Glasgow King's Theatre, 9/4/11

So I saw the show again in Glasgow some months after seeing it first time around. The Auditorium was packed and who should be there also? Only Benny Andersson! I don't believe he'd seen this version of 'Chess' before and I gather that he enjoyed it.

Much that I said in my previous, Edinburgh, review still holds true, but I found the show sharper and more focused, especially choreographically, this time. The music sounded amazing and Sarah Travis' orchestration is truly wonderful. I still have issues with the dance interludes, the song re-ordering etc. as before but I do feel the video played better this time 'round.

One thing I never mentioned before was how pointless it is to have Freddie apply exaggerated make-up and snort cocaine before the interview; we already get that he's a bit fucked up, so what is it trying to say? Is it an attempt to explain, somewhat, why Freddie's behaviour can be so erratic? Because he's a dope-fiend? It doesn't really wash with me. One has only to look at some of the real-life Trumpers of the world to know that there are some people who just are obsessive, dangerous and unpredictable. Unless, of course, that particular scene is all for Walter's benefit who seems to have some sort of sexual fascination with the American at this point. Walter becomes incredibly creepy and disgusting at such times. Power over people is obviously a turn on for him. Saying that I found that Walter (James Graeme) being played with an English accent really does nothing for the plot - it is much more appropriate that he be American as per the original; as the idea of an Englishman and Russian making deals has no real power in the cold war story. The whole purpose of Walter and Molokov is to represent the politic machinations of the time and the change in Walter's nationality negates that immensely.

The cast overall, however, were far more at ease with their roles than previously although this meant that at times Daniel Koek as Anatoly was a bit too over-the-top, too often for my liking. His ad-libbing with vocal lines and timings also left me a bit underwhelmed at times, though when he's on fire he's on fire!

The whole production is somewhat heightened so the cast do need to be 'bigger' than the norm but there does come a point where it just becomes a bit annoying. Shona White, as Florence, was also at risk of the same but managed to just about toe the line and reign herself in before she goes too far. James Fox's Freddie was again a standout and his manic characterization perfectly suited the production and the role even if he does slap his hands once too often.

David Erik's Arbiter was excellent again and the entire ensemble shone even better than before. Poppy Tierney as Svetlana and Steve Varnom as Molokov were both notable despite the odd dodgy Russian accent. Varnom's mic also suffered some issues during the evening which makes me think that the free-floating head mics that are typically worn these days (the type that follows the jaw line) aren't necessarily better than the type that is glued to an actor's face; at least then the mic is harder to knock or move.

Sound and lighting design were crisp and exciting, more so than I had previously noted, and I found the production as a whole was funnier than before whilst, with sharper choreography, the dances (although quite dramatically redundant) were excellently executed.

I still feel the last half of act II is a bit rushed and truncated, never really allowing time for any sort of exposition on the state of the relationships between Anatoly, his wife and his lover. Also; the newscast dialogue, primarily spoken by Walter, is often stunted and could do with being sped up a little, although I'm sure this is the fault of director Craig Revel Horwood and not the actors. As they are, these speeches slow the flow of things and, being necessary for exposition, should be worked on more; if only to sustain audience attention. That said this is still a truly wonderful show and the friend I took, never having seen 'Chess' before, understood what happened onstage perfectly, saying that the physical direction certainly helped.

I really hope that it gets a shot at the West End, albeit with some tweaking especially in that last quarter.

The Book

There is a saying that the three most important things in a musical are book, book and book.

The ‘book’ (or libretto) is, in essence, the glue that holds all the separate parts of a show together: It’s the narrative structure that allows the story to be told without being simply an amalgamation of dances, songs and dramatic scenes. The story is the skeleton which the musical, choreographic and dramatic materials are attached to.  Important aspects of the book include telling the story clearly (and concisely), allowing situations in which song and/or dance can tell the story and push the plot forward. It is also usual that it is the book that creates characterization whilst the songs create an emotional climax/release. Since a musical is a collaborative art form it is usual that the book writer and song writers will work together to ensure that a transition from dialogue into song and vice-versa is as easy and as natural as possible. Likewise all disciplines, be they dialogue, music, lyrics, dance, should work together and sympathetically toward the same goal of telling the same story. There may be places where one speciality is better at telling the story than another, so some form of diplomacy is required.

It is often the book that is criticised for a show failing although there are many successful shows that have weak books and many more short-lived shows with strong books.

I write about the subject of ‘the book’ because I was reading about some of the works of Tim Rice and the subject struck me as an intriguing one: Rice’s work, I think, epitomises the two extremes in the argument of the need for and success of ‘the book’.

Rice is heralded as being innovative in having discarded the book when he wrote the lyrics to Andrew Lloyd Webber’s music for Jesus Christ Superstar, which was initially written for record before being produced theatrically (although this was the ultimate aim from the point of view of the writers). Rice himself has written that any innovations that he and Lloyd Webber initiated were happy accidents along the way of creating the record and were not necessarily their intent.

Looking at the lyric booklets provided with the album there certainly are no stage directions, but there are descriptions of days and places such as ‘Bethany, Friday night’ (used in the 1972 London production as displays). But are detailed stage directions a necessary part of what constitute the book? Reading Rice’s lyrics one certainly gets a sense of what’s happening and what needs to happen from a directorial point of view, and this can also be said of the works of Shakespeare who never wrote any stage directions himself: I recall learning in university how the ‘sacred’ texts that we take for granted as being written by Shakespeare were in reality reconstructed from several sources including actors’ rehearsal copies, leaving the possibility that those actors tweaked their own lines, that lines originally excised by the author were retained having appeared in earlier versions etc. etc.

The place, times and even entrances and exits of characters were created after Shakespeare originally wrote his words. So Shakespeare basically wrote only the words spoken by his actors. Clearly this is enough for any director as we continue to have endlessly inventive productions of Shakespeare whose words are enough to let a director, and an audience, know what is going on and what needs to happen on (or off) stage. Do Rice’s words serve any less?

Yes, a dramatic play and a musical book are different things, but do they not serve the same purpose; as a means of telling a story?

So did Rice really eradicate the book? Or did he simply, accidently, re-write what it constitutes? Opera librettos are really nothing more than the lyrics and the same can be said here: Superstar is an opera in the idea that it is told entirely through music and lyrics. The same is true of Evita whose Lyric booklet does have more detailed stage directions than Superstar. But like any good opera, directors continue to find new ideas and create new productions all the time.

Where Rice is applauded for doing away with the book for Superstar and creating a clear, concise structure through lyrics he is often criticised for the book in the musical Chess (music by Björn Ulvaeus and Benny Andersson), a musical of some length with minimal dialogue.  Many complain the plot is too complex or even unbelievable; accusations that Rice has refuted and proffered evidence against. The history of Chess as a show is far more convoluted than its plot; hence its history of being constantly reworked by director after director, starting with the first; Trevor Nunn (don’t get me started).  Chess was produced, like Superstar and Evita, as an album first and that album too had a book containing the lyrics, though there was a note indicating that the album was not the complete show. Included, however, was a complete synopsis of the story together with the full lyrics, together with stage directions as in the Evita booklet, of the music and scenes contained on the records (many of the stage directions were carried through to the published script) and reading the synopsis and lyrics one has a clear idea of what is going on in the story.

When it came to be staged the plot was reworked slightly in parts, lyrics were altered and song order rearranged – all per director request (much to Rice’s later regret). I shan’t go into later Chess variations (i.e. Broadway and beyond), some of which had Rice’s input, many of which did not, but I shall concentrate on the original London production which is the closest to the original album. Rice published the London Chess script in 1994 with a few more, very minor, alterations from the original London script (these include returning the original lyrics to ‘The Story of Chess’ and eliminating the meeting of Florence and Svetlana – a few lines of dialogue only - during ‘I Know Him So Well’ which served no real purpose).

Reading the published script it is easy to follow the story, so long as you pay attention to the lyric, and although Rice chooses not to always immediately give reasons for a character’s actions, he does offer consistent insights into behavioural traits, allowing a spectator and an actor to assemble a whole character, whilst his lyrics offer both clear and metaphorical commentary on both character and action. The least well written part is that of Svetlana, if only because she has little time in the show, and is not often referenced while not on stage. Many have said that the Sydney production, reworked by Rice with director Jim Sharman (who also directed the 1972 productions of Superstar in Australia and London), solved the issues of the book including expanding the Svetlana part, but I honestly believe that the London book is not as flawed as many make out.

Rice’s stage directions are basic and brief but are clear enough as any other libretto I’ve read and they allow leeway for a director and his/her designer. Perhaps at times some actions and plot exposition need reinforcing to ensure that an audience can understand (as one really must pay attention to the lyrics in Chess, even the abstract and metaphorical ones – and what’s wrong with that?) but Rice refrains from writing complex stage directions telling a director what needs to happen physically onstage to do so, while a good director will have little trouble coming up with something that will play sympathetically with the score, without altering a lyric or a melody, and certainly without screwing with plot as has often happened.

Rice reworked Chess for the 2008 Royal Albert Hall concert in an attempt to create a definitive, and clearer, version of the show. Rice admits that the concert didn’t completely meet his aims but he has said that it’s the closest that’s been achieved so far.  The current UK tour directed by Craig Revel Horwood reworks the show again, and not always to its betterment in my view (see my review), and often undoes some of Rice’s efforts in the concert version (including reinstating long, dramatically unnecessary, dance sequences that Rice excised – but then Horwood is a choreographer), although it is a thrilling and exciting production. And it’s true that most revivals rework shows these days, though I wish they’d consider what they do with more care.

Reading the libretto of Chess I wonder how close a director needs to adhere to the stage directions in order to clearly tell the story. I have experienced productions of Chess that don’t strictly keep to the stage directions and so long as the lyrics are left alone the story flows quite easily. So again, the lyrics (and dialogue in Chess’ case) are more important to the story telling and any embellishments on a director’s part should only serve to enhance that telling. And this is true of all the musicals cited here.

So here we have Rice lauded for doing away with the book and its inherent problems when writing Superstar and blasted for trying to create a complex and detail-rich story, asking the audience to think, when writing Chess. When thinking about Chess and why people are often confused by it I often wonder that perhaps it’s laziness on an audience’s part, as though they are unable to put the lyrical pieces together to come up with the whole. After all, it is all there!

I wonder that, where an audience is willing to pay attention and listen to what is said in a play, they expect a musical to just wash over them with only the minimum of attention required. The 80s heralded the mega-musical and Chess certainly was one of these, but it actually does demand something more from an audience than was usual; respect for the text.  Perhaps it is because the book is a little more complex and demanding of an audience that Chess is less attractive, whereas Superstar is simpler, both plot wise and lyrically and one doesn’t necessarily have to hear every word to know what’s going on. Whatever the reason both scores are excellent both musically and lyrically.

It is interesting to note that Rice is rarely credited as being the author of ‘the book’ for these two shows; in America Tom O’Horgan is often credited as writing the book for Superstar, having contractual billing as ‘Entire production Conceived and Directed by’. But having written the book? Hmmm, I wonder. In Chess’ case, on Broadway at least there certainly was a book credit – the script was rewritten by Richard Nelson who was brought in by Trevor Nunn to basically rewrite Rice’s plot. Originally - prior to previews - Rice and Nelson were both credited as book writers but, ultimately, only Nelson was credited come opening night and, apparently, Nelson’s contract means that only his script can be used in the US and his name is credited even if his script is not used. Thankfully this does not apply to the original UK version which was written by Rice, who is not often even credited with the book. And if Rice is not credited here then no one is.

Another bookless musical? Chess?  I don’t think so: Its book is detailed and complex and, given the necessity of the plot, remains surprisingly clear and uncluttered (despite its turbulent history and development) allowing the story to move along.

These days song lyrics are more than simply entertaining words – they are text that allows exposition, character and plot development. So rather than recreating the book, perhaps Rice, together with Stephen Sondheim, simply reinvented the lyric and its importance.

'Chess The Musical', Edinburgh Playhouse, 23/9/10

Here's a review I wrote last year.
As I shall be seeing this production again in a few weeks I thought I'd put my original views on the production up before I review it again:

I had eagerly been awaiting this production directed by Craig Revel Horwood as I am a long standing fan of ‘Chess’. Even despite some of my doubts when the idea of actor/musician was mentioned. Even when the first production shots appeared displaying costumes which wouldn’t look out of place inside a fetish club. I still needed to see this giant of a show which has too long been overlooked!
So what about the production itself? Well, it certainly is very different to any previous incarnations of ‘Chess’, and I think many of the elderly patrons of the theatre present (and there were lots of them!) were certainly taken aback with the look and attitude of the show.

Revel Horwood has directed a thrilling, exciting, funny, gripping and outstanding production which will certainly give ‘Chess’ a new lease of life in the 21st century.
It is, by no means, perfect but the production, as a whole, has a massive ‘Wow’ factor about it; veering away from the previous realistic presentations of the material Craig Revel Horwood interprets the musical with a visual flair and uses theatricality to the piece’s advantage. He uses his actor/musicians almost as a greek chorus who observe and interact whilst playing the intricate music faultlessly. Others have mentioned that the choreography (also by Revel Horwood) could have been executed more sharply but this really is a minor point. The orchestration by Sarah Travis is truly impressive. She manages to produce a sound that is as powerful as the original production whilst also giving the music a fresh lease of life. Again I applaud the cast who play seemingly effortlessly (and without the aid of sheet music) whilst acting, singing, dancing and assuming some rather uncomfortable looking positions (pity the cello players!). The instruments are also incorporated into the show as would-be props such as microphones and it doesn’t take the audience long to forget that the cast also acts as the orchestra. No mean feat with such a large orchestral compliment!
The set and costume design by Christopher Woods is also a refreshingly different approach and, though some of the costumes could easily be used in a live sex show, they work well for such an intelligent show. The idea of chess as a game and metaphor is reinforced throughout with references to ‘pawn’ throughout (especially on the video floor during Bangkok). Though the video designed by Jack James at times appears out of synch with the vocals it all still works well although one wishes that more had been made out of the 'newscasts' the last of which has no video whatsoever yet is still staged as if being presented to an off-stage camera.
The sound, at least where I was seated, was excellent. Clear, unclouded and quite stunning.
Lighting by Ben Cracknell used a lot of straight lines and square shapes with the only noticeable deviation to this idea being at the very end of the show (the idea of chess as metaphor certainly was reinforced in this production). The lighting design was quite appropriate and sympathetic to the show though during ‘I Know Him So Well’ especially I felt the stage was too well lit.
Revel Horwood also adds creative touches such as the ‘boxing ring’ scenario between Florence and Molokov. The Embassy officials, the merchandisers (with a musical reference to ABBA’s ‘Money, Money, Money’) are comedic highlights. The sexual relationships are also brought to the fore between the leads with onstage foreplay present which contrasts to ‘One Night In Bangkok’ which seemed quite tame to me. The dramatic element is also heavily present although Revel Horwood does let the production lose some coherence toward the end of the show.

Whilst it is evident that some music and dialogue was excised (primarily to cut down the running time) it is, for the most part, done unobtrusively. Indeed, as much as I adore ‘Merano’ it wasn’t missed (although it was originally intended to be in the production) as the show ploughed ahead with almost breathless energy. Only toward the end were some of the cuts missed; I, for one, wished Revel Horwood had kept ‘You And I’ intact and let the show end there rather than having a truncated reprise of the afore mentioned number followed by an unexpected, and seemingly almost inappropriate, reprise of ‘Anthem’. There are, in my opinion, better places for cuts - the dance section of 'The Arbiter's Song' and the musical interludes in 'The Story Of Chess' serve no real purpose and would have cut the running time down and may have allowed for 'Merano' to be restored, at least in part. But anyway ...

The cast were sublime. The company excelled and it’s a shame to have to concentrate on the leads. But I shall.

James Fox as ‘Freddie’ was a revelation. Many have said Adam Pascal to be a perfect ‘Freddie’ but I really think Fox has the advantage. He presents the American player with a vitriolic temper which verges toward the violent in his interactions with ‘Florence’. Fox’s ‘Pity The Child’ was probably the most amazingly performed rendition I have witnessed. Full of emotion and pain Fox’s voice soared which was complimented by Revel Horwood’s simple staging. The only problem here was that, with the American’s big number transported to act I it almost leaves the character with nowhere to go (though it is staged impressively effectively and appropriately). When ‘Freddie’ sings the shorter ‘Pity The Child (Reprise)’ (otherwise known as ‘A Taste Of Pity’) following ‘The Deal’ it feels like an anti-climax and the lyric has no relevance. I might as well mention here that ‘The Deal’, always my favourite part of the show, was a brilliant piece of staging with excellent performances throughout.
Daniel Koek as ‘Anatoly’ brought a new youthfulness to the role along with a great voice. His portrayal made ‘Anatoly’ a more three dimensional character than is usually given. Here the Russian displays a darker, more selfish, side not seen before; making him more like the American than he would care to believe. It also lends credence to the choices he must make at the end of the show. ‘Anthem’ was a vocal triumph as was ‘Endgame’.
David Erik’s ‘Arbiter’ was a dominant force throughout, roaming around like some S&M M.C. whose shadow fell upon the proceedings of the evening. His physical and vocal flexibility added to the idea that a romantic game really was being played as if by the Gods of Olympus.
James Graeme and  Steve Varnom, as ‘Walter’ and ‘Molokov’ respectively, gave us rounded, interesting characters with Graeme revisiting a character previously played in a production of ‘Chess’ also directed by Revel Horwood (which can be heard on ‘Chess: the complete cast album’) but here he presents a radically different interpretation to that previously given. Here ‘Walter’ is presented with an Englishman but with all the slime required of the part. Varnom is an impressive figure and throws enough weight around to be a potential KGB agent. It’s interesting to note that all the Russians have an appropriate accent in this production.

As ‘Svetlana’ Poppy Tierney, who I’ve had the pleasure of witnessing in a production of ‘Aspects Of Love’ where she excelled, started off as quite a weak character upon her entrance with ‘Someone Else’s Story’ but soon presented a more vicious face during ‘The Deal’ and her interactions with her estranged husband. These interesting and different facets to an otherwise two-dimensional character were employed well.

‘Florence Vassy’ is certainly the primary role within the show and Shona White doesn’t disappoint. Although she is the only actor not to perform a musical instrument in the show she gives us a ‘Florence’ who is still something of a child, attracted to strong men (replacements for her long lost father) despite the fact that she knows they are no good for her. It’s almost as if we see ‘Florence’ coming to terms with adulthood and her past before our very eyes throughout the show. Her relationships with both ‘Freddie’ and ‘Anatoly’ each move from childish giddiness to full tormented realisation as the mist fades from her eyes in each case. White’s vocal delivery is well suited to the role and, though she can be a little nasal at times, she reigns supreme. ‘Nobody’s Side’ and ‘Anthem (Reprise’) were fine showcases for her abilities.
The show moves and flows effortlessly (again credit to the actor/musicians here) but I do feel the ending was a little unsatisfactory. It simply felt a little rushed and almost came out of nowhere. As I’ve mentioned before I would rather the final reprise of ‘Anthem’ had been cut rather than the sublime ‘You And I’ which would have offered more emotional insight into the end of the romance between ‘Anatoly’ and ‘Florence’.
I’ve also mentioned that I feel strongly that ‘Pity The Child’ (despite the incredible staging here) really should be in act II. And I think the same of ‘Heaven Help My Heart’ which rings as unbelievable when ‘Florence’ sings of loving the Russian who she’s just met. It would certainly make more sense for her to sing about these emotions a year down the line in act II.
But these are just my quibbles on an otherwise amazing production. A production which deserves to have a shot at the West End of London. With a little bit of tweaking in staging and design (the tour has a 5x5 ‘chess board’ which is of an appropriate size for a touring show but could be expanded to a full 8x8 board were it to be launched into a larger London theatre) the production has the energy, passion and talent to make it a deserving winner.
There is a part of me that would love for this show to recieve a live cast recording - to capture the glorious cast, the sublime sound the orchestra makes and the energy that only live recordings can deliver. I can hope.
I look forward to seeing 'Chess' again. And again.