Charity and the '86 Critics
It's hardly a secret that this Charity revival received less than rapturous notices in Minneapolis, Chicago, and Boston. Will the New York critics be kinder? I thought I'd look back today on the reviews received by the first Broadway revival of Sweet Charity, the twentieth-anniversary production that opened at the Minskoff Theatre in April of 1986 and went on to win that year's musical-revival Tony.
Naturally, we start with The New York Times, where Frank Rich began his review with the intriguing question, "Can six or seven knockout song-and-dance turns transform an also-ran Broadway musical into a classic?" Of course, it's necessary to note that the series of splendid numbers Rich goes on to single out were scrupulously recreated by Bob Fosse himself from the original choreography. This is in contrast to the latest revival, which features new choreography by Wayne Cilento.
While Rich complained about the "dreary book" in this "tired-businessman's entertainment," he also noted that "an average musical in its day seems to have appreciated in value now." 1985-'86 was not a strong semester for new musicals, and particularly disappointing was the recently opened, new Fosse musical Big Deal, next to which Charity looked all the better.
"Neil Simon's hapless script could still use major surgery," Rich went on to note. "Maybe the author himself might choose to forget this book, which starts off flat and reaches oblivion by the fumbled bittersweet conclusion." Such issues seem to have been addressed by the current revival, which features book revisions by Simon that include a new ending. One wonders how successfully those revisions will address what many found to be the show's chief problem in '86. As Rich put it, Sweet Charity gives us "a love-starved heroine of such sentimentalized masochism that she makes a doormat seem like the Rock of Gibraltar."
Rich felt that '86 leading lady Debbie Allen "somewhat lacks the vulnerability of Gwen Verdon," but also called her "dynamic" and "sizzling,....almost eerie in her recreation of her predecessor's Chaplinesque gait and sparkling gymnastics."
Turning to the first of several '86 critics who will be reviewing the 2005 Charity as well brings us to Clive Barnes in The New York Post. Barnes felt that the ghost of Verdon hung over the '86 production, simply because Fosse had so specifically tailored the show to its original leading lady. "Mr. Fosse's error was in not completely rebuilding and reshaping the role on Miss Allen, and letting her give her own, new interpretation." As in Rich's notice, Barnes felt that "the show remains a lively one---particularly while regarding the skeleton-strewn desert of the contemporary Broadway musical....Look over this season's competition, and you may well decide to spend a little time with this one." Barnes also praised "some of the most riveting dance images the Broadway musical has ever achieved."
The Daily News critic at the time was Douglas Watt, who gave the show an enthusiastic review. "The return of 'Sweet Charity' is a blessing, and Debbie Allen is a joy forever," he began. And while Watt mentions that the book "has grown just a bit stale around the edges," he praised Cy Coleman's "most exuberant score" and "some of the finest work {Fosse} has done." Watt concluded, "It's great to have this ebullient musical comedy back on Broadway, and it's doubly great to find the bewitching half-pint called Debbie Allen at the heart of it."
Allan Wallach, then Newsday's critic, began by comparing the revival to the disappointment of Big Deal, quickly going on to say that Charity "was sweet and sassy when it opened 20 years ago, and the new production comes close to matching it." After praising the dances, music, and lyrics, he noted that "time hasn't been kind to Neil Simon's book." He found Allen "an appealing performer" if no Verdon. He praised the unknown Bebe Neuwirth, who got her break with and won a Tony for this production. "Theatergoers in 1986 should enjoy spending a little time with this show," Wallach concluded.
The current Newsday critic is, of course, Linda Winer, who reviewed the 1986 Charity for USA Today. She found this first revival "a slick, cloying show with one of the unfunniest books Neil Simon ever wrote," and while she went on to note that it included "some of Fosse's wittiest, slinkiest choreography," she found Allen's performance unsubtle.
Mike Kuchwara will be reviewing the new Charity for the Associated Press, just as he reviewed the '86 production for A.P. Back then, he found Charity to be "in remarkably good shape" thanks to a "smashing new production and a superb cast." Kuchwara called this "a fine example of the skillful collaboration needed to bring off that behemoth known as the big Broadway musical." Kuchwara liked just about everything in the '86 Charity, even Simon's book, and concluded by calling the production "a reminder of what Broadway musicals once were---melodic and just a great deal of fun."
Another critic who reviewed the '86 production and will be reviewing the new one for the same outlet is Gannett Westchester's Jacques le Sourd. And he filed another favorable '86 notice, beginning "If you need to be reminded of just how sensational a musical, even a minor modern musical, could be in the glory days of Broadway, check out Bob Fosse's revival of his own 'Sweet Charity'." Calling the evening "smashing entertainment," le Sourd loved the piece and the staging but had major reservations about the star, noting that "nothing about Allen spells vulnerability." He called Neuwirth "a major discovery" who "completely upstages Allen whenever they're on together."
Like Kuchwara and le Sourd, Robert Feldberg will be reviewing the new Charity in the same venue he reviewed the '86 model, in this case The Bergen Record. Feldberg also maintained that the '86 Charity looked good because of the weakness of the season's other musicals. Even with a book that he felt is the show's "weakest link," he found Charity "the best musical of the season."
John Simon is, of course, still at New York Magazine. In '86 in that publication, he began his review of the revival by stating, "The musical 'Sweet Charity' struck me as a great yawn back in 1966." Simon felt that "Neil Simon one-liners do not blend well with the Italian source material," and that "Coleman's tunes are remarkably unmelodious." Simon wasn't even enthused about the evening's raison d'etre: "Some of the choreography still works smashingly, although little of it is integrated into the story line....Fosse's choreographic signature is too insistent and limited." He called Allen "a dazzling performer" who lacks the essential vulnerability.
In Time Magazine, William A. Henry III called the book "more often predictable than funny," the score "so-so." He also noted Allen's lack of vulnerabilty, but admitted that the show's virtues could be enough for a good run.
And finally the television critics, who in 1986 were still numerous and fairly important. While comparing Allen unfavorably to Verdon, Stewart Klein WNYW said, "I had a good time. Given its flaws, 'Sweet Charity' and the other gals at the Minskoff will show you a good time." Joel Siegel ABC thought the show's choreography supplied "the kind of excitement that lifts you out of your seat." He warned that the show is "an old-fashioned musical, as in, where is the story?" But "the two big hit songs, the fantastic Fosse dance numbers, and Debbie Allen make the evening fun."
Dennis Cunningham CBS found the production "an absolute joy, cause for celebration....the big, bold, bountiful Broadway musical comedy is back....Debbie Allen herself is endearing, enchanting, and absolutely wonderful, as is in fact this entire musical." While Pia Lindstrom NBC was less enthused, she said the show was "still fast paced, flashy, and has some fetching numbers." She felt that Allen missed Charity's pathos, but summed up the evening as "a high-stepping and probably hot ticket."