Why Broadway Doesn't Need a Revival of Andrew Lloyd Webber's Feline Extravaganza
The "classic" Andrew Lloyd Webber musical, Cats, will be returning to Broadway this summer, the first time it has been revived
in New York since it closed in 2000. Wow, it's been 16 years since Cats closed.
Almost as long as the show's original run (18 years). In fact, when it closed,
it held the record as the longest running show on Broadway, which is an impressive
feat for a show with a score that is alternately mediocre and irritating and
has virtually no story whatsoever. I mean, I really think there should be some
sort of rule that the time between a show closing and its first revival should
be longer than the initial run of the show itself. Our respite from that
steaming hunk of crap should be longer than the time we had to suffer
that show taking up space on Broadway. Make
some room for something new.
But we can't, of course, because Broadway musicals cost so
much to create that only known commodities will be produced. Look at the ever
shrinking theatre listings page in the New York Times and you will see that
almost everything on Broadway fits into one of three categories: revivals,
juke-box musicals (shows built around existing songs that usually are old
favorites of baby-boomers), and new shows based on a movie. Basically, anything
that can capitalize on nostalgia. It is amusing to note that the Winter Garden
Theatre, which housed Cats for its record breaking original run, has been
occupied by virtually nothing else since Cats' closing, being the venue for
Mamma Mia (the ABBA juke-box musical), followed by the short lived Rocky the
Musical, and now the adaptation of School of Rock (also featuring a score by
Lloyd Webber).
It's hard not to sound elitist, and I am trying to avoid old
clichés like "attracting the bridge and tunnel crowd," and I am
trying to not say outright that much of the Broadway audience are unsophisticated
tourists, but it is hard to look at Broadway and argue that most of what is
produced is geared towards a discerning audience.
 |
| Me at 15 in Bye Bye Birdie. I'm only putting this here to show that there was a time when musical theatre was very important to me. |
"But what about Hamilton? What about The Book of
Mormon?" To have one innovative must-see show each season while other original pieces tank left and right is not a sign of a diverse and thriving Broadway scene. I didn't mean for this to turn into a diatribe about the slow death of the American popular theatre, but again, when Cats is being revived, something
is wrong.
I mean, let's be serious. Does anybody really like Cats? I
think that people who know nothing about theatre pretend to like Cats to seem
cultured. To be fair, the show was visually lyrical and beautiful (mostly due
to the talents of choreographer Gillian Lynne). I can only imagine that first
time theatre-goers might be dazzled into thinking that there is a greater theme
that they're missing. They might be embarrassed to confess that they got bored after
the first fifteen minutes and were only staying because they wanted to hear that
"Memory" song that comes at the end of the show.
 |
| Admit it. You want to see this show. |
I don't know. I really don't. What's the solution? I can't expect theatre producers to be
altruists whose goal is to provide unique, innovative, cultural nourishment,
but still, "give the people what they want" should be the credo of
YouTube, not Broadway.
You know what? I'm going to cut this diatribe short. This is becoming a bigger conversation than I
wanted to have, and even I am getting sick of my own negativity anyway. Long story short, boycott the Cats revival and see some new
theatre. And stop making juke-box musicals and musicals based on movies. It's
getting really old. Except, you know what? I really want to see a stage musical
version of The Three Amigos. Now, that would be great. Randy Newman wrote some
great songs for the movie and I'm sure he could be persuaded to write a few
more.
Then that's enough.
