The Musicals

I hate not to start from the beginning. But I am going to start from the end, i.e. the “Starlight Express” I saw last night.

I had not had great hopes for the show. I had not thought that I would like it, and I was right. I don't like it, though I admire the actors' hard work. It must be difficult to roller-skate, dance, jump, act and sing at the same time. But the story itself was so shallow that for which whatever visual effects and singing and dancing could not compensate. It was like a children's story - competition among trains and carriages and trucks. The chasing around the theatre for as many as three times was tiring and monotonous. I had to be very patient to sit through the whole performance. I guess the two German girls sitting beside me just could not stand it so they left at the intermission.

But I have learned something from it. It is that there are so many types of theatre in London to cater for various tastes. Surely young folks would like this musical for all its loud music, colourful/strange costumes and excitements. Otherwise it could not have lasted for years.

“Starlight Express” is just like “Cats” and “Miss Saigon” - weak stories presented glamorously. But it is a pity that I don't like any, not even one, of its songs.

There are huge differences between“Starlight Express” and the musicals I like.

I saw “Martin Guerre” on my first night in London. The rescheduled flight from Firenze (which had already made me spend several miserable hours in Firenze's tiny airport) together with all my bad habits made me miss the first scenes (which lasted for 8 minutes as I was told). But I have fallen in love with it. There were so many folds of the story - the peasants’ attachment to the land, the struggle between the Catholics and the Protestants, why the marriage between Martin and Bertrande, why Martin left, why Arnaud du Thil could not resist the imposture, etc. The story and the acting were touching. The male lead was irresistible. He had a casual and light air. The souvenir brochure describes Arnaud as “seductive” and “charming”. No doubt the actor did it beautifully. I am so glad that it was the original cast that I saw. I liked it so much that I went to its matinee show again two days later.

The next evening I saw “Jesus Christ Superstar”. What an experience! I love the story. I have always loved it. It is complex, touching and the lyrics are great. I fell for it the first time I saw it performed in Czech language in Praha. This time, the design of the stage, and many arrangements and ways of presentation were different from what I had seen before. For example, I had not seen in the Czech production the torture of Jesus and the crucifixion (too brutal!). But it was so good. I was thrilled. I had never known before that when Jesus sang “Judas, must you betray me with a kiss?”, the emphasis was on the kiss - betrayal in its sweetest form! And Jesus’ surprise as his followers asked “Hey, JC, JC, won’t you die for me?” was touching. At the scene of the 39 slashes, instead of using a whip, they splashed blood on Jesus’ body, which produced just the same shocking effect. Though I don’t really like the acting of Judas and the way Mary Madelene sang, I love the show. It was very powerful and worth our stand-up applause. When the show was over, I saw a girl with a sad face and a red nose. I would think that she was so moved that she cried. I did overhear many saying that they wanted to cry. It was simply splendid.

Then it was “Les Miserables”. I have always liked this musical. But this time it turned out to be a wasted evening. I was disappointed mainly at the performance of Jean Valjean. The actor’s voice was so soft that he could not deliver the part of Valjean successfully. His “Bring Him Home” was insufferable. This was the worst performance of “Les Miserables” I have seen so far. The actress playing Fontaine also had a soft voice, as did some of the other actors. And my seat was on the side, giving me less pleasure that it would otherwise. The orchestration also sounded strange (but I think it was probably because of my seat). But despite all its flaws, the audience still stood up at the end. It was strange indeed, for I did overhear some audience saying that they didn’t understand the story, e.g. a French girl sitting in front of me said so during the intermission (it is quite understandable when we come to think that even some native English speakers don't understand the story).

And so I have discovered the secret of the popularity of the “Phantom”. It has the grandeur of classic theatre, a full and easy-to-understand romantic story, all the dramatic elements - love, unrequited love, hate, murder, revenge, and beautiful songs one after another. It is not deep, but deep enough. This is why everyone who wants to see a musical in London goes for it. I agree that if one sees only one musical in his life, it should be the “Phantom”.

That was why I went queuing for a returned ticket for its matinee show last Wednesday. I had not planned for it (it would have been unreasonable if I had because I had seen it so many times before). But I felt so unwell when I was in the National Gallery that day that I could not go on walking any more. I didn’t want to return to the hotel. It seemed best for me to stand still. So I stood for two hours outside the theatre for a ticket hoping to spend the next two and a half hours sitting in the theatre. But I didn’t get a ticket that day. I can’t tell if I was fortunate or unfortunate, because I later learned from a poster that the “Phantom” was (still) played by Simon Bowman, and I hated his performance. So maybe I was lucky in a way.