Blogtown, PDX

Thursday, August 23, 2007

Artsy Spamalot

Posted by Alison Hallett on Thu, Aug 23 at 5:02 PM

Saw the Broadway Touring production of Spamalot (the Tony-winning musical based on Monty Python and the Holy Grail) at the Keller last night. What did I think? Oh, uh… you know. The songs were boring, the cast mumbled, and the only funny bits were lifted directly from the movie. It was sort of nostalgic, I guess, if you’re a Python fan (though The Adventures of Baron Munchausen is at the Laurelhurst right now, I would advise saving yourself $72 ). Basically, I would recommend it to you if I thought that you were a middlebrow sucker.

But apparently Portland audiences ARE middlebrow suckers, because the totally unearned standing ovation segued into clapping in unison and it just went on and on and on… Dudes, seriously. You don’t have to ovate to be polite, you really don’t. Unless the show blew your freakin’ mind (which I can only hope this one did not), just clap politely, collect your things, and leave. Or does it not feel like you got your $75 worth unless you get to participate in some kind of collective frenzied mind meld wherein you demonstrate through the force of your clapping how sincerely you value the arts?

Ah well. Anyway. Spamalot.

Permalink

Comments

this post is some hilarious shit and you saved my mother 70 dollars.

thanks allison, you're my fav mercury writer.

Posted by coolidge | August 23, 2007 10:21 PM

Some thoughts on your review and blog entry.

Why would anyone want to see SPAMALOT?

I wanted to see how the story of Monty Python and the Holy Grail is heightened through song and staging.

Should you save yourself $72?

Touring Broadway shows cost about that much to see at the horrible Keller auditorium. Is it ever worth $72 plus fees to see a $12 million production?

Standing ovations are seldom earned. The question is, who's the bigger idiot? The person who stands up to clap in time or the person who refuses to stand and ends up looking at someone's but for 5 minutes. Guess it depends on the butt.

I was surprised to find myself laughing at scenes that felt flat on my last viewing of the movie. I think they worked because Mike Nichols is still a very good comedy director and the trained actors brought something fresh to the material instead of simply mimicking the Python crew.

The production is cartoonish (as was the film) and has broader appeal because Mike Nichols insisted on some kind of story. How would the theatrical equivalent of a policeman putting his hand over a camera lens work on stage?

I agree that the songs aren't that great but the staging of those songs is faithful to the spirit of silliness in the film. Both contain dancing knights. The musical adds a Monk and Nun pas de deux, Vegas show girls, and Lancelot in a silver cod piece.

I'll say that as a Python fan I was not disappointed.

Among the Pythons, Terry Jones thinks the musical is superfluous. John Cleese voices God. Michael Palin receives CD royalties for writing the Fish Slap song. I'm not sure what Terry Gilliam thinks. His animations set the tone for the entire production design.

Posted by Bruce | August 30, 2007 10:07 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).