Review: Merrily We Roll Along

[jducoeur]

A quick review, while I think of it. Last night, we went to see Merrily We Roll Along at the Huntington. You should go see it.

This is one of Sondheim's less-known shows, adapted from a 1930s play by Kaufman and Hart. It tracks the lives and careers of a trio of friends -- in reverse. The show opens on Frank, a successful and decidedly annoying hotshot producer in the mid-70s. He is rich, famous, outwardly chipper, and hollow as a Kinder chocolate egg, having lost pretty much everything he really cared about along the road to success, including his original passion for composing music. (There is a lot of clear "there but for the grace of God" from Sondheim in Frank's story.)

From there, the story rolls backwards, year by year, asking "how did we get here?", exploring the fall and rise of Frank and his two best friends, Charley and Mary. It ends with them as idealistic 20-year-olds, sitting on a rooftop in 1957 as Sputnik passes overhead, feeling their whole lives ahead of them.

In lesser hands, the concept would have been precious, but Sondheim is a master of form and structure. (During intermission, I mused to Kate that it would be fascinating to be a fly on the wall for a conversation between him and Alan Moore.) Since the story starts at the end, there is little "what will the end be?", or even "what will happen next?" -- each scene largely post-shadows the one before. This is replaced by a host of nuances that are simply there early in the show, which gradually make more and more sense as you learn more of the history. This is a life story as hologram, only really comprehensible when you see all of it.

The music is quite good: not one of Sondheim's best, but certainly not one of his worst, either, and it has catchier bits than many. (Ironically, given that the show overtly mocks critics who demand hummable music.) The direction is excellent, and the cast brilliant -- in particular, Frank shines in a challenging role, starting as the shallow 40-year-old cad and gradually de-aging into a dorky but loveable idealist. I gather that the original run, in the early 80s, failed quickly -- in fair part because they cast it with very young actors to make the de-aging look good, and they simply didn't have the required depth yet. This time, the stars are seasoned vets, and while, yes, Frank does look a bit craggy for a 20-year-old, having experienced actors in all the major roles pays off.

And for all that you can't avoid a bit of melancholy from the story, there's nothing fatalistic about it: even Frank admits that his situation is entirely the result of his own decisions, good and bad. This is an exploration of the way that our choices -- and the way we allow ourselves to be pushed around by others -- shape our lives, and the consequences of getting what we chose.

It's fine stuff, and the theater was criminally empty even for a Tuesday (the mezz was maybe a quarter-full), so I suspect there are still tickets to be had. It's running for a couple more weeks, and is well worth seeing: check it out...

Comments

[jducoeur]

although very little of Beth's stuff was changed from the version I remember, somehow in this particular production, the theme of her ambition struck me in the face, whereas in other productions I've felt she came across as nice first and not so much ambitious as "hey, not living on ramen would be nice." I don't know if that was the production, or me.

Hmm. I didn't get that from Beth, who I thought was broadly quite sympathetic. I would agree that Gussie is problematic, and was one of the few characters who I didn't really feel was three-dimensional.

On the other hand, the song is *less* interesting and nuanced, because it was all on one emotional note.

Okay, I can see that. I thought it worked well, and I didn't *quite* find it so one-note: there's a steady emotional crescendo throughout, IMO. But I agree that in this version he clearly starts off angry at Frank -- indeed, it's quite clear that he's *been* angry at Frank for quite some time -- and is gradually losing his remaining self-control about it, rather than it being that sublimated at the start...

[desireearmfeldt]

Hmm. I didn't get that from Beth, who I thought was broadly quite sympathetic. I would agree that Gussie is problematic, and was one of the few characters who I didn't really feel was three-dimensional.

Interesting; that implies that my reaction to Beth was more about me than about the show, which is not necessarily surprising. My strongest memories of the show are from when I was 16-17, and though I have seen it as an adult at least once, it would have been 10 if not 20 years ago...

As for Gussie, she's way more 3D in this version than in the original, where she is pretty much a plot device and doesn't get anywhere near as much stage time. And that's the text, not just me. :)

I agree that in this version he clearly starts off angry at Frank -- indeed, it's quite clear that he's *been* angry at Frank for quite some time -- and is gradually losing his remaining self-control about it, rather than it being that sublimated at the start...

Yeah. And I do think that angrier-Charlie made for a slightly more 3D version of Charlie&Frank's relationship/storyline. So there's that.