What Are Your Thoughts on Mack & Mabel?

[catstagestud]

I'm in production of a musical that does not get produced very often, Mack & Mabel. There's obviously the horrendous book that makes this piece of theatre very hard to enjoy and really holds it back from being great but do you think it will ever get a revival with what I believe to be a truly beautiful Herman score? Maybe a revision of the book could help it?

What would you like to see be done with it, if you'd even want to see it again, and who do you think might be fantastic in the lead roles?

Cheers,

Christopher

[Jordan Catalano]

I love love love the score but as you said the book is the biggest problem. City Center talked about doing it with Jane Krakowski a few summers ago so hopefully they'll revisit the idea someday, however I cant see a full scale broadway revival happening without someone completely overhauling the show.

[tazber]

They are always re-writing this trying to fix it and nothing works. I think they have produced at least 2 different versions with various changes.

Herman has mentioned in interviews that he still wants to find a way to make it work.

The score is absolutely gold though, as you said.
It's my personal favorite Herman score.

[newintown]

Fun score but the book's tone is entirely at odds with the music & lyrics.

If they could re-write it as a true musical comedy and leave out some of the more extreme bits of darkness and tragedy, it might be more successful.

[darquegk]

In early drafts, many characters were thinly veiled Jimmy Hart Versions of celebrities from the time in which the play was set, right? But (at least as far as I remember), the book has gradually shifted to actually addressing these people without artifice.

Was that a good step or a bad one?

[philitalia]

I saw a revised version at the Piccadilly in London in 1995 (I think the ending was more upbeat and songs were added). Not a commercial succes, but I had a great night out. I don't think that version went anywhere afterwards.

What about giving it to Menier Chocolate ?... They seem to have the Midas touch at the moment.

[Ed_Mottershead]

There was a production at the Paper Mill sometime in the 90's. They'd tried to "improve" the book, but the show still didn't work. I agree, though, the score is glorious and, IMO, Jerry Herman's best.

[JoeKv99]

I looked at directing the show once. I still find myself trying to fix the book....

[frontrowcentre2]

Shaw Festival in Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON had a very successful run of this show few summers ago. It used the most recent revised script by Michael Stewart's sister. The score is glorious but really is at odds with the material, and more distressingly seems loaded with incident but doesn't really tell us much about the people. Songs like "Time Heals Everything" and "I Promise You a Happy Ending" should break your heart, and while the songs are wonderful they don't have any more impact from being heard and seen in context.

[philly03]

Great score... "Time Heals Everything" is my favourite Herman song actually.

[mallardo]

The book is not so horrible. I saw the John Doyle production in London a couple of years ago (with David Soul very good as Mack Sennett) and it worked beautifully. For me it's Jerry Herman's geatest score.

[tazber]

M&M is definitely my most played Herman score. I love Mame, Hello Dolly, La Cage, even Dear World - but I listen to this one regularly.

(off topic: Grand Tour is another under appreciated score)

[garyl]

Going to see it at Stage Door Theatre in Fl in Sept. Saw the original in previews in DC. Anxious to see it again. Have always enjoyed the score. Herman's best

[CurtainPullDowner]

Hate him love her.

[catstagestud]

garyl, that is the production that I'm in! Hope you enjoy it!

Cheers,

C.

[Dollypop]

I saw the original production and loved it very much. Unfortunately that was so long ago that I can't remember specific details.

[Mr Roxy]

Looks like Dollys advanced years are catching up to him.


Amazing the score was never nominated for a Tony. One of the great mysteries of life.

[newintown]

Weird Tony year, that one. Score nominees were:
Letter for Queen Victoria (? - ran about 3 weeks)
The Lieutenant (? - ran 2 weeks, and featured Eddie Mekka, aka Carmine Ragusa)
Shenandoah

And the winner was The Wiz.

Also ignored: The Magic Show, Goodtime Charley, and The Rocky Horror Show.

[tazber]

Wow, I did not realize that.

Goodbye Charlie and Rocky Horror are two of my faves.

The Magic Show deserved to be overlooked imo.

Has anyone heard Letter To Queen Victoria or The Lieutenant? What were they like?

[newintown]

Never heard of either as far as I recall til now.

Letter to Queen Victoria was a Robert Wilson event, so I doubt that the score was a fun listen or recorded.

The Lieutenant was described by Clive Barnes as a rock opera about the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War.

[Scripps2]

I too saw the John Doyle version and thought it was the most coherent production I've seen; you weren't left with the feeling that the book and scre were at odds with one another.

Having said that, The Grand Tour has now eclipsed M&M as my favourite Herman score.

[Amalia Balash]

Absolutely adore the score. The book not so much. I wish someone could split the songs up and put the ballads into different musicals the way some Cole Porter and Irving Berlin songs went from show to movie to show until they finally fit somewhere.

[qolbinau]

The ending of this musical seems so interesting. I wish I could read the libretto (or see a production), but from what I can gather from the wikipedia synopsis, the concept/subtext of singing "Tap Your Troubles Away" while someone is addicted to drugs would be awkwardly humerous/'challenging', as is the concept of the last song "I Promise You a Happy Ending". Is this where the book doesn't work? You don't think SOME director could pull this off?

I guess I am asking, is the tone of the book/score kind of like the strange awkwardness when FOLLIES transitions from the argument with the four leads into "Loveland"? I can just imagine a bare dark stage with a drug addicted "Mabel" suddenly transitioning into a large bright "Tap Your Troubles Away"....which would seem to work for me.

But again, this is just me imagining having never seen the show or read the libretto..

[GavestonPS]

The book isn't "horrendous", it simply suffers from being based on real people and (unlike FUNNY GIRL, say) the fact that Michael Stewart felt the need to be more or less true to Mack Sennett's and Mabel Norman's actual lives.

The simple fact is that they worked together early in their careers, had a brief romance and then went their separate ways. Each did interesting work without the other, though as the show demonstrates, Mabel's "serious" career didn't enjoy the same popularity as Mack's Keystone Cops.

But the problem with the show lies in that phrase "went their separate ways". Act II of the show is a painful exercise in trying to invent excuses to keep Mabel in the show. I worked on a production that Ron Link directed, starring Lucie Arnaz, shortly after the Broadway production closed. The big joke among the cast was "What's in the little red suitcase?" In order to justify Mabel running into Mack on a boat dock so that she can sing "Time Heals Everything", that version actually gave her a line to the effect of "What am I doing here? Oh, I'm looking for my little red suitcase." Said suitcase was never mentioned again except backstage to much hilarity.

Jerry Herman as been saying for years that the problem is that the ending is sad, but lots of successful musicals have sad endings. (See most R&H shows.) Ron Link solved that problem by giving Mack a line, "What's the point of making movies if you can't change reality?", and then replaying the overture and staging it as Mack's "Hollywood happy ending" vision of what his life would have been like if Mabel had lived and come back to him.

It worked beautifully. But it didn't solve the problem of a second act in which the leading characters live in different worlds, travel in different social circles and make different types of movies.

Great score though. Still my favorite of Herman's. But there's a fundamental structural flaw that no amount of window dressing is going to fix. This isn't to say it can't be fixed, but as with ANYONE CAN WHISTLE, nobody to date has figured out how to do it. (Disclaimer: I did not see the Doyle production.)

Oh, and BTW, I saw Jane Krakowski play Mabel for Reprise LA. I know we all adore her and rightfully so, but she sang the score as if she were counting 8s in her head. If nothing else, Mabel has to have a very distinctive voice to make that score work; merely singing well, even very well, is not enough.

(ETA as this lengthy post indicates, I really loved the Ron Link production of the show. (Michael Stewart on the other hand, walked out of the tech rehearsal, threw his opening night tickets at me and told me to tell the creative staff he wanted nothing to do with it. He stomped out, so I didn't get an explanation as to why he was so upset. And just to be clear: he wasn't being unkind to me personally; he was just really in a bad humor.) And the show sold pretty well by Miami standards and considering it hadn't been a hit on Broadway. But it didn't solve the basic structural problem.)

[hermajesty]

I loved this musical which I saw in London many years ago. My favourite number is 'I won't Send Roses'
Caroline O'Connor was in the role

[PalJoey]

It's a great score, but you can't have the heroine die from heroin (!)--and then have the hero say, "Oh, well, I promised you a happy ending."

They thought that was being honest and true to life, but it just made for a bad musical.

I don't believe it can be "fixed," without changing history or changing the style of the score, which would be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

And I agree with all who love The Grand Tour. That's the Jerry Herman score to revive!