|
Originally Posted by MysticCat81
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you have provided one "specific" and ask: does one bad experience herald the downfall of American theatre?
And "High Society" = "some such non-sense?" Ummm, yeah, it is a musical version of "The Philadelphia Story," with music by Cole Porter. I guess you've never seen the movie, starring Bing Crosby (definitely a better singer than actor -- he pretty much always played himself), Grace Kelly, Frank Sinatra, Celeste Holm, John Lund and Louis Armstrong.
Yeah, okay. That's one show from 1957. (And a show that in many ways, according to its composer, is more of an opera than a musical.) Of course, it lost the Tony for Best Musical to "The Music Man" in 1958. And do you remember the other nominees -- "New Girl in Town," "Jamaica" or "Oh, Captain!"? And, of course, you ignore the many, many shows that require dancing by the main characters. I mean, really, Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers?! Fred wasn't that strong an actor either -- like Bing, he played himself.
It's a bad idea to judge the current state of the American theatre by one show, just as it's a bad idea to judge the history of the American theatre by one show -- even one as remarkable as "West Side Story," which may be an exception to the rule. "WSS" story doesn't change the fact that frequently in the history of the American musical theatre and movie musical, the ability to sing or dance well has been deemed more important than the ability to act well.
BTW: since you say that WSS had parts written for singers, parts for dancers and parts for actors, would Tony, Maria and Anita classify as parts for actors, singers or dancers? Not anybody can sing Tony and Maria's parts, and Anita has to do quite a bit of dancing (which is perhaps why someone whose training and background was primarily dancing rather than acting -- Chita Rivera -- was the first Anita).
|