…made into musicals.

I realize that may sound strange coming from a guy who *writes* musicals, but that’s just how it is. The more I hang out with/watch interviews with/read books by musical-theatre creators, the more I start to pick up a vibe: “Every play, movie, novel, band, and theme-park attraction could be made better by turning it into a musical.”

Part of this has to do with our culture’s love-affair with re-hashing previous successes. An obvious example would be Hollywood, constantly churning out a stream of re-makes, comic-book adaptations, and sequels of sequels of sequels. Because adapting a previous success means you’ve got a sure thing on your hands, right? An original musical? Whoa…that’d just be too big a risk!

A while back, I came across this article, and was pretty horrified. For the record, I’ve seen the film *and* read the book it was based on, and enjoyed them both. Aside from the terrifying, sickening gore, there’s a fascinating psychological story underneath. It’s disturbing and it’s absolutely NOT for everyone, but I appreciated it. That aside, while I was watching/reading it, I wasn’t thinking to myself that it would make an amazing musical. Why not? Well, because it won’t. As a novel and as a film, American Psycho is already enough. There’s nothing lacking that could only be filled through song and dance.

(Oh, and while I’m on the topic: this isn’t a good idea either, and I’m dubious about this.)

Now, I could be wrong. One of my favourite professors once told a story of how, years before, he’d scoffed when he heard that Victor Hugo’s Les Miserables was being turned into a musical. The esteemed professor declared that it simply couldn’t be done…and then was happy to eat his words when Les Mis premiered and took everyone – including him – by storm.

And I’m the first to admit that a number of the best musicals ever written were adaptations of existing works. Little Shop of Horrors was based on a movie, Cabaret came from a play and a book of short stories…but the point is, the creative teams chose to adapt these works because there was something in them that could only be expressed through song. Turning these works into musicals *added* something meaningful. Nowadays, this cardinal rule seems to have been forgotten. The main criterion which seems to drive many producers/composers/lyricists is simply “has anyone else musicalized this work yet?”

Is it really too much to ask for us to have a little originality in musical theatre? Can’t we have at least *one* show that isn’t a) an uninspired direct-to-stage transfer of a movie, b) another revival, or c) based on a Disney cartoon? Because the thing is, audiences today are being force-fed the theatrical equivalent of fast-food. Then, when some innovative producer tries to offer them steak, they’ll turn it down…because it isn’t familiar, non-threatening, and packaged in a flashy styrofoam container.

Advertisement