![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A few weeks ago, I watched Camelot on Broadway. I grew up listening to the original cast recording. Seriously—grew up listening to it. I had tapes with this, My Fair Lady, and Man of La Mancha on them. Aside from being Richard Burton, Julie Andrews, and Robert Goulet, the Camelot score is dense with word play that I did not understand at the time, so I always have a double understanding—the actual lyrics and what eight-year-old me thought the lyrics were. (My mom once caught my brother and I singing “the musty month of May” and did not correct us. It’s lusty.)
I therefore was going to see the Broadway production no matter what it was, just for a chance to see this on stage. The original musical had a famously bad book (for those not in on the jargon, that means all the dialogue that’s not a song). At one point it was four hours long, what one reviewer called “a Gotterdammerung-esque bladder buster.” Therefore, having a new book was not in itself a bad idea. Having a new book by Aaron Sorkin, though, kind of was.
Last night I rewatched the film. I’d seen this as a kid and hated it. Now rewatching it—it’s okay. If it were an hour shorter (it’s three hours long) and had a different actor as Lancelot (he’s both awful and has a thick Italian accent), I could see really digging it. As it is, it can be enjoyed for the hats alone.
The original musical—or at least the film adaptation by Lerner himself—was flawed. The new version is a train wreck.
(I should preface by saying I know it’s based on Once and Future King which I tried to read and didn’t get past the first part of, so I can’t speak to how either version are as an adaption.)
( Let’s talk about the movie )
( Then there’s the new book by Aaron Sorkin )
Yeah, so that’s Camelot. A show that never really worked and still doesn’t. Um, I liked the sword fighting? Lancelot’s performance of “C’est moi” was fantastic. Maybe there’s a way to write a new book around the existing songs that would be good actually, but I doubt it’s going to get any new treatment again. It took sixty years to come back around to Broadway this time. Sometimes works are just flawed and that’s what it is.
I therefore was going to see the Broadway production no matter what it was, just for a chance to see this on stage. The original musical had a famously bad book (for those not in on the jargon, that means all the dialogue that’s not a song). At one point it was four hours long, what one reviewer called “a Gotterdammerung-esque bladder buster.” Therefore, having a new book was not in itself a bad idea. Having a new book by Aaron Sorkin, though, kind of was.
Last night I rewatched the film. I’d seen this as a kid and hated it. Now rewatching it—it’s okay. If it were an hour shorter (it’s three hours long) and had a different actor as Lancelot (he’s both awful and has a thick Italian accent), I could see really digging it. As it is, it can be enjoyed for the hats alone.
The original musical—or at least the film adaptation by Lerner himself—was flawed. The new version is a train wreck.
(I should preface by saying I know it’s based on Once and Future King which I tried to read and didn’t get past the first part of, so I can’t speak to how either version are as an adaption.)
( Let’s talk about the movie )
( Then there’s the new book by Aaron Sorkin )
Yeah, so that’s Camelot. A show that never really worked and still doesn’t. Um, I liked the sword fighting? Lancelot’s performance of “C’est moi” was fantastic. Maybe there’s a way to write a new book around the existing songs that would be good actually, but I doubt it’s going to get any new treatment again. It took sixty years to come back around to Broadway this time. Sometimes works are just flawed and that’s what it is.