SLEEPLESS IN SEATTLE, THE MUSICAL

 

Every now and then, someone calls me out for writing theatre reviews that are too “soft.”   They accuse me of not telling the whole truth about how bad some shows I review are. And I get it; but I’m usually just trying to say something nice. Plus, I go by the reactions of others in the audience, as well, because unlike some other reviewers, I don’t think that my opinion is the only one that counts!

But I finally saw a show that begs the brutal truth.  Even though I absolutely love the PR people for the Pasadena Playhouse, (which makes it painful for me to give a show there a bad review,) I’m afraid I must be brutally honest on this one. I feel bad ragging on work that so many people have put into it, but it wouldn’t be fair of me to not let potential audience members know what they’re getting into.

[Note: By the way, I’m far from the only one who felt this way on opening night; every single person I spoke with at the theatre, and afterwards, (when we had more time to reflect,) said the very same things I had already written in my notes. (I just can’t wait to see if the other critics I talked with will have the courage to write the truth.) The “reviews” in the ladies room alone were more scathing than this one!]

So, here goes: In cases like this, I try to at least pick-out one positive to impart to you, but no such luck this time. Sleepless In Seattle, The Musical, is basically dreadful. On every level. It should be re-named Sleepy in Pasadena, or The Never Ending Song. (I’ll explain that one in a minute.) It’s the most banal, vanilla, square presentation I’ve ever seen.

For purists, it appears that the musical version follows the story in the 1993 film. But therein lies the very first problem with this show–IT’S THE STUPIDEST STORY EVER!!! Moviegoers that year must have been hard-up for entertainment to have made this a hit.

It’s basically the story of a delusional stalker, even though the writers seem to think it’s cute for a woman to write to a widower she hears on a radio show across the country, and then fly there to stalk meet him, even though she’s engaged to someone else and has never even communicated with this guy, in any way! Heck, she’s never even seen a picture of him! How can you root for someone like that???

And we’re supposed to be happy when they wind-up together??? Give me a break.

And let’s talk about the equally deranged young son of the widower. He sees a letter from this girl to his father, among supposedly thousands that the man received, and insists she’s the one for his dad? (With no reasons that are shared with us, expect perhaps because she included the kid in the salutation of her missive. Or mentions she likes baseball. Or, because the writers give her what they think is a cute moniker—“Annie.”) And because of his new “Annie obsession,” the obnoxious kid is rude to the attractive, sexy, fun-loving girl his father is seeing, and seems happy with. And we’re supposed to be ecstatic when the kid gets his way? And not mind when he runs away from home and takes a plane cross-country by himself, on this crazy quest to find this woman??? I’d punish him for life. Or maybe send him away to boot camp. What a brat! [Note: I don’t believe in ever hitting kids, but this character made me re-think that position a bit!]

Seriously, the story is just the most annoying one ever, and why anyone would choose it to turn into a musical is well beyond me.

Especially twenty years later, when everything about the story, and show, is dated to the Nth degree. If it had been made shortly after the movie came out, I could understand, even though I’d loathe the story just the same.

Back to the narrative a second; when was it ever okay to stalk someone, especially a stranger? And how insane would a girl be if she was in pain about not getting to be with someone she never met or spoke with? The guy didn’t even answer her “cutesy” letter, for goodness sake! In this age of uber-technology, (and the dangers of meeting a stranger through social media,) everything about this scenario seems crazy.

But worse than the concept of the whole show, and the basic inane story, is the music. EVERY SINGLE SONG SOUNDED THE SAME!!! (That’s why I dubbed it The Never Ending Song.) They all sounded like a Will Ferrell character had written the score. Mr. X and I occasionally make-up terrible Broadway-type ditties for fun, and as intentionally awful as ours are, they’re possibly better than the ones in Sleepless In Seattle, which the composers, Ben Toth and Sam Forman, were serious about! (The funny thing is that someone that night commented on how bad the “song” is, and that it was so not catchy that even after hearing it all night, you couldn’t leave the theatre humming it. I had to remind her that it wasn’t really just one song playing over and over! But we had to check the program several times to make sure.)

Granted, the actors all sang really well, but no one was special. Joe West, who played the young son, had a nice voice, but was way too nasal. Every time he sang, I felt like I had to blow my own nose!

Tim Martin Gleason, who played the main guy, Sam, had the basic “lovely Broadway voice,” (that I actually enjoyed,) but he should take a posture lesson from Scott Willis, who plays the transsexual in the Pantages Theatre’s Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, and has the most gorgeous posture ever! It’s hard to view someone who hunches-over as a love interest. (Except maybe, in a weird way, in the Disney version of Hunchback of Notre Dame.)

All the roles are played as pat, musical comedy characters, which is annoying to watch. The only person who made me laugh was Adam Silver, as Sam’s brother-in-law, who did as much as possible with the few lines he had. He comic chops were really on a different level than everyone else’s in the cast.

The set, designed by John Iacovelli, (whose work I’ve lauded several times before, saying of his sets for Peter Pan earlier this year: “a lot of thought and work went into them,” so this was an odd misstep to me,) is the basic everybody-run-up-and-down-the-stairs-to-show-the-stage-is-on-two-levels set-up; I’ve seen better in high school productions.

The so-called production numbers were a waste of choreographer Spencer Liff’s talents, (which have been showcased often on So You Think You Can Dance, so I know what he’s capable of.) When the big dance number is two white dudes attempting the snake, the sprinkler, etc., you know they’re desperate.

But the most egregious error in judgement was made by Kate Bergh, the costume designer. I don’t remember the clothing of the early ’90s being as horrible as these were. Even if they had been, this is a musical comedy, for goodness sake, not a Masterpiece Theatre period piece where every article should be spot-on for the times—cheat a little so we have something fun to look at!  And if all the characters had money to fly across the country for a day, I’m sure they could have afforded to dress at least somewhat better than this! There was not one attractive outfit…on anyone! It was one monstrosity after another. The un-attractiveness of the costumes was downright distracting. Really.

I’ve seriously wracked my brain for the past few days to try to think of anything positive about this production, but just can’t. And neither can anyone I’ve spoken with in my quest to be kind. It’s actually not the worst show I’ve ever seen; it’s just that every single element of it was wrong.

But, if you’re a die-hard fan of the movie, and don’t mind almost three hours of the same song over and over, (they may be different, but none of us could tell if they were,) with bad wardrobe, and nothing special in the way of performances, maybe you’ll like this production. But don’t say I didn’t warn you this time.

Sleepless In Seattle, The Musical running through June 23, 2013
Pasadena Playhouse  39 South El Molino Ave.  Pasadena  626-356-7529  www.PasadenaPlayhouse.org