MovieChat Forums > West Side Story (1961) Discussion > Probably the best decision(s) they made ...

Probably the best decision(s) they made for the movie

posted 15 years ago by StrongRex
75 replies | jump to latest

Just reading the play script...it is so full of awkward and rushed dialogue, inconsistencies with characters and situations, and several of the scenes are misplaced. Whoever decided that "Cool" and "Gee, Officer Krupke" should be in the scenes they are in the play...that alone shows the author's writing leaves a lot to be desired. Arthur Laurents, I am looking at you.

Yes, I have heard the argument that "Gee, Officer Krupke" is supposed to be an angry song. Yes, I have heard the argument that "Cool" was meant to show Riff as a powerful leader. But those arguments still do not match up, and I'll tell you why.

The Jets may have been angry when singing "Gee, Officer Krupke," but there were still comical elements in the song that's guaranteed to make people laugh. I'm not saying it's a happy-go-lucky song, but it's still very comical. After Riff's death, we are not supposed to laugh. The enjoyable moments were supposed to be before the rumble, and now that it's happened and lives have been lost now it is time to get serious. The movie did a wonderful job of making this clear but the play did not. And just the general way this scene was written, it just didn't have that same effect on me. It didn't seem to me that the Jets were really that concerned about what just happened, that they even cared. They just didn't seem to be reacting as urgently and drastically as they should have been. Unlike in the movie, where they were going insane and ready to tear the Sharks limb from limb, and where "Cool" actually applied to the particular situation, they showed little worry about the after-effects of the rumble, they sang "Gee, Officer Krupke" even though it had nothing to do with making sure they got revenge on the Sharks, and then when Anybodys shows up then they decide to take their situation seriously. That seemed really forced and out of place.

Which brings me to my next point; of all the Jets they could have chosen to take Riff's place as leader, they chose Action. And they don't give any early hints or indications that Action is going to mature enough to be a good leader when the story calls for it, Oh No!! He goes out of character and immediately becomes the cool-headed, authoritative type for no reason when throughout the entire story, he is consistently portrayed as hot-headed, always ready to fight, always yelling and using his fists, and he would NEVER make the good decisions the writers forced him to make. This is what I mean by character inconsistencies. Action didn't become the way he did in the second act because he had the character development for it, he became the cool-headed authority because the plot needed him to be.

Here is where the movie got this right: They, as we know, put "Gee, Officer Krupke" after the dance and before the war council, and they put "Cool" after the rumble which, as I said, applied way better to their current situation and actually made sense. AND, they kept Action in character and chose a better, more realistic candidate to replace Riff: Ice. This character should have been in the play!

Another song in a different scene I sort of have a problem with is "I Feel Pretty" taking place after the rumble and before Maria finds out that Tony killed her brother Bernardo. I'm not as nit-picky about this scene as the other two I mentioned, because you can't really blame Maria for not knowing the truth yet. But at the same time, the tone of this scene is still inappropriate if it immediately follows a horrible, gut-wrenching sequence of violence. And in the back of our minds we know that Maria's happiness is going to be horribly shattered when she hears what Tony did, and it's just more torture on the audience. At least in the movie, when the song took place in the bridal shop, you still had hope that everything was going to work out well for our two lovers. Seeing her perform it after the rumble is just torture, and for the same reason I gave for "Gee, Officer Krupke," there's not supposed to be more fun to play out through the plot. After the rumble, it's serious business.

The dialogue also flows better in the movie; when reading the script most of the lines were shorter, more choppy, and just plain awkward like they've turned in the first rough draft. You could just tell the writers could have worded the lines a lot better. In the movie, I felt the lines were almost perfect.

I'm not saying I didn't like the play, but I sure as heck liked the movie a LOT better than I did the play. I still consider West Side Story to be my favorite musical of all time, and Tony is still my number one dream role onstage. Hopefully, if I even do get the role the director might make similar changes to the script to make it more like the movie. I know that's not likely to happen but I can dream.

I heard they put on a revival of West Side Story a couple of years ago if I'm not mistaken. All I heard was they gave the Sharks more dialogue in Spanish, and dubbed the entire "I Feel Pretty" number in Spanish. I don't know what else they did, but I don't think it included putting "Cool" and "Gee, Officer Krupke" in their proper places. You would think after making the movie and seeing the difference of the plot's improvement, they would have made those same changes to the play so it would have made more sense. Unfortunately, they still haven't, and that just really gets on my nerves. At least I still have the movie to enjoy; the people who made that at least fixed those mistakes.

[–] mikwalen 15 years ago

Hi! BRAVO to your entire post!!!

I feel as you do – the film version works much better than the stage version. I have a personal anecdote about this:

Three years ago, I directed WSS for my church’s theater group. I had planned on adding the Shark boys into “AMERICA”, and worked out choreography for them.

Now comes the contract from the theatrical leasing agency, Music Theater International. There were a bazillion clauses in the contract about what we could and couldn’t do with the show. Among them –

- We were NOT allowed to cut any music. This created a problem, because I wanted to trim the “prologue” and the dance break in “COOL” a little bit, due to having kids that weren’t really dancers, and because I’m not a true choreographer.
- We were NOT allowed to add the boys into “AMERICA”. I hadn’t planned on altering the song, I just wanted the boys in the number. We were strictly and specifically forbidden. I had to re-do all the choreography.
- We were NOT allowed to move “COOL”, “KRUPKE”, and “I FEEL PRETTY” from their original spots.

Believe it or not, what I DID get about two weeks before the show opened was a sheet giving me “politically-corrected” line changes!! I was expected to incorporate them into the show. Nothing doing. My cast by that time had learned the lines and I wasn’t about to upset and confuse them with sudden changes.

Technically, I wasn’t supposed to change any lines of dialogue, but I did it anyway. In a church setting, I wasn’t about to use some of the raunchier lines and language. I substituted similar wordings that got the point across.

By the way, I saw the Broadway revival. I didn’t care for it. They ruined the final scene – the curtain drops on Tony lying dead in Maria’s arms. No gang repentance as they join together and pick up Tony’s body. I have to say that some of the acting and singing was pretty weak.

"Everytime I want to have a little fun-SHE turns out!" (Baron Bomburst)

[–] StrongRex 15 years ago

Oh my gosh! I totally forgot about "America" in my post! That's another song/scene I had a problem with. I had no issue with it being after "Tonight," but I did have an issue with the Sharks discussing the flaws/good things about America and then Bernardo and his gang just leave, and then it's only the Shark girls singing that song. And in that song, it is many girls who are in love with America pitted against one girl, Rosalia, who is feeling homesick. This scene might have worked if there were at least several more girls on Rosalia's side and the girls who were on the side of America didn't have an unfair advantage. Plus, the lyrics, like the dialogue, were awkward, rushed, choppy, and pathetic.

The lyrics in the movie's version of America were wittier and much more clever. It is also more entertaining when it's the boys against the girls, plus it doesn't force the situation by forcing Bernardo to leave before the song. It further develops the scene by having him stay, and actually letting him have a singing part. This is one of the play's biggest flaws; it tells you that Bernardo is a lead role, and yet he doesn't sing once by himself.

I totally know what you mean about the clauses when directing the play. We did West Side Story when I was in high school (mediocre production AT BEST), and our director brought up the fact that he was not allowed to change anything like that either. However, I went to see a production of WSS at the park 5 years ago, and they had changed the play to make it more like the movie. They switched "Cool" and "Krupke", they added the boys into "America", and they put "I Feel Pretty" in the beginning of Act 2 in the bridal shop. I can't remember if they got in trouble or not, but I would have enjoyed that production a lot less if they had kept to the original script.

But my director apparently had no problem cutting some core pieces of music out of the big numbers for no other reason that he was just being lazy, even though we had an excellent choreographer that made the dances much more doable. I personally don't think the Prologue needs to be trimmed, given it's not as long in the play as it is in the movie, but he did that. With the Rumble all they did was play the intro over and over, and with the Somewhere ballet (which I had never seen onstage), they cut all the dances and just had the soloist sing.

Personally, I think "Cool" was a bit extreme for the situation it was given in the play. It totally works after the rumble, but before the war council...? What are they supposed to keep cool for? The Sharks? Doc? It didn't come across to me as a desperate, life-or-death situation that the context of the song calls for. Once again, Arthur Laurents, your writing leaves a lot to be desired.

Strange, my school's production did the same thing at the final scene; Tony is lying dead in Maria's arms, and everyone just leaves them alone. The director didn't make sure the gangs showed signs of repentance, and a lot of the acting and singing was weak in the production I was in.

[–] mikwalen 14 years ago

Hi Dan!

Arthur Laurents is in record saying that he is not thrilled with the film version. I have a book called A FINE ROMANCE, which details behind-the-scenes stories about Broadway to Hollywood transfers. It contains an essay written by Laurents saying that he thought Rich Beymer was just an “ingénue”, and that the Jets looked like “chorus boys”. He did not like the switch of the song positions either. In the special edition dvd, he is interviewed, but I noticed he stayed away from criticisizing the film in his comments. (By the way, Laurents also hated the film of his GYPSY, which happens to be another one of my favorite stage-to-screen transfers).

I agree with you 100% about the positioning of those songs in the film. COOL is too intense for the pre-rumble atmosphere. The lyrics alone beg to be placed after the rumble in the stressed out, explosive attitude that the boys now have. I also am with you on having the boys in AMERICA. I realized that Bernardo doesn’t sing a note in the stage show! I wasn’t going to have him actually sing, but I *was* planning on having the boys dance in the number.

The person who handles the paperwork for my drama group at the church was too afraid to let me take a chance on changing things – believe it or not, those agency people DO drop in occasionally when one of their shows is being done, and all kinds of legal trouble can start if they get crossed! Apparently ,the estates of Robbins and Bernstein fanatically guard all the properties associated with these men. Sondheim is also known to be zealous in protecting his work, and has been known to “check up” on productions of his work.

It is true that the prologue is not as long in the show, but I was edgy about getting the show off to a bumpy start and that's why I wanted to trim it just a bit. Since I knew my limitations as a choreographer, I staged the prologue with some basic steps and had “scuffles” between the Sharks and Jets occur throughout, before the big fight at the end when Schrank comes in. I threw the Jet and Shark girls into the prologue as well – hey, the contract DIDN’T tell me I couldn’t. This used up some of the music and showed the tensions between the female counterparts as well. I didn’t have a problem staging the Gym Dance and AMERICA, though. The music in those numbers is easier to deal with. SInce we have a small budget, we usually use it on nice sets and costumes. A choreographer would usually want a nice chunk of change, so I try to do it myself.

Thanks for your posts!

"I was NEVER in the chorus!!!!" (Vera Charles)

[–] nateba 14 years ago

They made you do the dream sequence? That's frequently cut.
My wife has conducted WSS a couple times. She says that "Cool" is nigh unto impossible to do with cuts because it's structured as a fugue.

cinefreak

[–] StrongRex 14 years ago

B) The "Officer Krupke" scene is a tragicomical way of the Jets pointing out that they, too had issues that needed addressing.

Well yes...it is tragicomical but still comical, and therefore still inappropriate post-rumble. I even admitted that it was not a happy song in the beginning, but the general way it is written people are still going to find the song funny. Laurents and Bernstein were not thinking of that.

Arthur Laurents is in record saying that he is not thrilled with the film version. I have a book called A FINE ROMANCE, which details behind-the-scenes stories about Broadway to Hollywood transfers. It contains an essay written by Laurents saying that he thought Rich Beymer was just an “ingénue”, and that the Jets looked like “chorus boys”. He did not like the switch of the song positions either. In the special edition dvd, he is interviewed, but I noticed he stayed away from criticisizing the film in his comments. (By the way, Laurents also hated the film of his GYPSY, which happens to be another one of my favorite stage-to-screen transfers).

I heard the same about Leonard Bernstein...that he didn't like that "Cool" and "Gee, Officer Krupke" were switched in the movie. Man, those two are stubborn! I can see where they would be coming from in some way, because I probably wouldn't like it either if I wrote something and the movie producers/directors changed some things around. But at the same time, maybe the better thing to do, instead of being stubborn and upset, keep an open mind that maybe some things could work either way or work in a better way than how you put it originally. Maybe that's hard to accept for some people, but with WSS I believe Laurents and Bernstein have no excuse. Maybe I'm just being biased, but I believe so are they.

I agree with you 100% about the positioning of those songs in the film. COOL is too intense for the pre-rumble atmosphere. The lyrics alone beg to be placed after the rumble in the stressed out, explosive attitude that the boys now have. I also am with you on having the boys in AMERICA. I realized that Bernardo doesn’t sing a note in the stage show! I wasn’t going to have him actually sing, but I *was* planning on having the boys dance in the number.

Well, Bernardo does sing, but it's always in the chorus, never as even one solo. My director though, did have the boys come in and dance in our production, something you said you wanted to do. If I could find the sheet music for the movie's version of America though, I would probably give it to my director if I'm in West Side Story again, and see if he/she is brave enough to use it instead of the stage's lyrics.

The person who handles the paperwork for my drama group at the church was too afraid to let me take a chance on changing things – believe it or not, those agency people DO drop in occasionally when one of their shows is being done, and all kinds of legal trouble can start if they get crossed! Apparently ,the estates of Robbins and Bernstein fanatically guard all the properties associated with these men. Sondheim is also known to be zealous in protecting his work, and has been known to “check up” on productions of his work.

So...it's not enough they want to keep the play the way it is and that's it. They have to make sure NO productions whatsoever of West Side Story ever stray from the original script in any way, shape or form. Even if it's something as small as a church youth group or a high school production. I can understand copyright laws to an extent, but not when they are taken to a certain degree. I still don't agree it should be illegal to post movies or filmed productions of plays onstage, because sometimes that's the only way people can see certain stuff. As long as you acknowledge who it belongs to, there shouldn't be any trouble.

And also, since there are people who prefer "Cool" and "Krupke" switched in the movie, it should be optional to switch them. There is an optional insert in the "Jet Song" if I remember correctly anyway, so why not do the same for those two songs.

It is true that the prologue is not as long in the show, but I was edgy about getting the show off to a bumpy start and that's why I wanted to trim it just a bit. Since I knew my limitations as a choreographer, I staged the prologue with some basic steps and had “scuffles” between the Sharks and Jets occur throughout, before the big fight at the end when Schrank comes in.

I guess that is understandable. I never really agreed with complicated technical dances being what the Prologue was all about anyway. I think dancing should tell a story, not show off. There are shows in which complicated forms of ballet and such are appropriate, but even in some areas of West Side Story I don't think it is. The movie's Prologue was definitely longer, and I think in a way it dragged because they wanted to show off the dancing. They still succeeded at telling the story, but the dancing still got in the way.

So yes, I definitely have agree with you about that...I'll accept basic steps and several scuffles. But like I said before, my director had no problem cutting out most of the dances, and I don't think he got in trouble.

I threw the Jet and Shark girls into the prologue as well – hey, the contract DIDN’T tell me I couldn’t. This used up some of the music and showed the tensions between the female counterparts as well.

THAT is actually a good idea...I think that would really work for any production of West Side Story. I didn't think they were given enough to do in the show, and we also had no idea what their ideas were about each other. That would make sense for the girls to sort of be against each other too.

Our school had a small budget too, but I still think we could have done the play a lot better. We did Jekyll & Hyde the next year, and it was the best play we had done in 30 years. It was just too bad that the year before, WSS at my high school wasn't given justice because we didn't do the best with what we had.

C) Whatever West Side Story's shortcomings are (and I see Richard Beymer's casting as Tony as WSS's shortcoming), it is what it is, and I think that the Beymer-bashing in some circles has gotten out of hand.

I already stated on another thread that I disagree with your opinion about Richard Beymer and why, so I'm not going to bring it here. But you are right that bashing him has gotten way out of hand. Many people are so unfair to him when they don't even know the whole story. I don't either, but I know part of it involves Robert Wise forcing Beymer to act in the role of Tony in a way that Beymer didn't agree with, and as a result Beymer wasn't completely satisfied with his portrayal of Tony. I still think he was good; his kindness, gentleness, and love for Maria is all too evident in this movie.

But if you thought Beymer was bad, then you have not seen my high school production. The guy that my director chose for Tony was a LOT worse.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] StrongRex 14 years ago

You're welcome, and thanks for your compliments. I saw West Side Story for the first time in my 8th grade choir, and I have been a fan since my 15th birthday when I got the tape, and that was almost 7 years ago. So in that amount of time I have done research and tried to get in the show myself (though I was in it once and it wasn't a good experience).

Yes, I knew that he and Natalie Wood were not on good terms throughout the making of the movie. I couldn't tell when watching the movie that they weren't, so I give them both credit for expressing believable chemistry. I heard that one reason she didn't like him was because she, yes, had been dating Warren Beatty at the time and had wanted him to be Tony. But here is my personal opinion with that; if she really had such an issue with Beymer, she should have taken it up with the directors who cast him. It wasn't Beymer's fault he got cast as Tony, he probably auditioned just like everybody else. Plus, he was having a hard enough time trying to deal with Wise, as I mentioned earlier.

Also, she was already co-starring with Beatty in Splendor in the Grass that same year, so wasn't that enough? And Natalie Wood, being a child star...she of all people should have realized that being an actress involves expanding your horizons and working with many different people, not the same person all the time. Being upset at something really trivial like not working with the same person in one movie that you worked with in another movie just because you are personally involved with that person...that was really childish on Wood's part.

Where Beymer and Wood stood has a good ending though. I'm slightly iffy on this one, but I think a few years later, Beymer ran into her and she called him over. Not one to hold a grudge, Beymer walked over and they talked. He reported that she was very friendly and that she was a genuinely good person.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] movibuf1962 14 years ago

I love that someone is revisiting this topic of discussion which goes as far back as the film itself.

I'm 48 years old and saw the film for the first time at 12. It immediately became one of my favorite movies. I didn't even see it as a stage show until its second revival in the 1980's when I was in college. So many things struck me as odd: the singing of "Cool" in Act 1 didn't bother me per se, but putting both "Krupke" and especially "I Feel Pretty" in Act 2 AFTER the rumble just left a bad taste in my mouth. I understand in the plot point with Maria that she didn't know what had happened yet, but it still felt like an intrusion after the ultra-tragic Act 1 finale. One of the BEST compensations to come out of the film was to make "Pretty" a hybrid of 2 sequences: the song performed now at the bridal shop during the day BEFORE the rumble, and continue the scene later as an intimate rooftop dance by Maria alone as she waits for Tony. (The sight of Natalie Wood dancing alone in a white dress made me and probably much of the male population fall in love with her.) "Cool," of course is sublime in its shift to a low-celing auto garage as a spectacular form of musical group therapy. Tucker Smith as Ice (another strictly film creation) rocked. He should've been the Jets' leader the whole time!!

And did anyone notice the Overture is different on film too: the "Tonight" quintet on stage is always followed by "Somewhere" (in a very sad, minor-key arrangement), and then the mambo dance. The film overture replaces "Somewhere" with the lushest, most beautiful arrangement of "Maria" that I've ever heard. It makes the anticipation you're feeling happy rather than sad. I always loved it- despite everyone's criticism of the static Manhattan diorama at the beginning.

[–] mikwalen 14 years ago

I love all your comments!
It bothered me to hear that Natalie had issues with Beymer, because she’s one of my favorite actresses. However, I saw a photo taken “behind the scenes”, and they are sitting together smiling. I’d like to think that was candid and not “staged” for the camera.

Being in Staten Island, my shows are always in danger of being “checked up on” by the agency Powers That Be, who are all located in NYC. As such, we pretty much toe the line as far as sticking to the script. If we were in the Midwest, we could probably get away with making little changes. I do know of a NJ group that did WSS, and it was practically a dupe of the film, placed onstage. How they got away with THAT, I don’t know. I doubt they had permission, because I called MTI (the licensing agent for WSS) and asked (begged really) permission to use the boys in AMERICA, and the rep on the phone was adamant – can’t do it. As I stated earlier, the one area where I didn’t back down was on making little modifications to some of the references in the lines, given the venue in which we were playing.

"I was NEVER in the chorus!!!!" (Vera Charles)

[–] StrongRex 14 years ago

You know, when starting a topic like this, this subject should have gotten some backlash from people who think differently about it by now. I'm surprised no one has tried to stick up for the play's original script in this conversation yet. Usually, when I bring up the play's flaws to other people that I brought up here, I get plenty of people who disagree with me. I'm surprised I haven't gotten it here yet.

[–] movibuf1962 14 years ago

Oh, give it time. I'm sure the dissents will come out eventually, LOL. But I, for one, thank you.

[–] Matt-145 14 years ago

I don't have an opinion for either way, so am not a dissenter, but do point out that one was a live musical in the 50s, and one a recorded motion picture. Different audiences in different places

In the 50s, musicals were happy, and people didn't die. There was also an interval of 10 to 20 minutes after the fight. Given that the tension would have been disipated by the gap (with drinks and socialising in the lobby), and the need for something to bring people back in to the story/musical and not to upset a 1950s audience too much, as a unexpected and shocking death would have, the placement of these cheerier songs seems eminently sensible to me.

The movie is a single story arc, and a continuous building of the tension and mood is much more sensible, and doesn't need the cheerier songs jarring against that.

It's just horses for courses.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] StrongRex 14 years ago

Given that the tension would have been disipated by the gap (with drinks and socialising in the lobby), and the need for something to bring people back in to the story/musical and not to upset a 1950s audience too much, as a unexpected and shocking death would have, the placement of these cheerier songs seems eminently sensible to me.

If they really didn't want to have to do that to their audience, all they would have had to do was end Act One with the scene at Doc's, and move the bridal shop scene to the beginning of Act Two. The story for the stage musical would have been written much better that way because, like you said, it would have been more sensible for the mood and the more cheerful songs wouldn't have ruined that.

[–] movibuf1962 14 years ago

Great, fresh point of view- I didn't know such rules about not changing the original script were in place for any revival of a stage show- this is an education!! And you brought up one of my favorite changes in the film which I neglected to mention: making "America" a heated, witty, sophisticated song-and-dance debate between the guys AND the girls (instead of just the girls) may have been the best change in the entire film. The last time I saw the movie in a theatre, this number got rollicking applause from the audience at its conclusion.

What a showcase for Moreno and Chakiris!!

[–] StrongRex 14 years ago

Rightfully so. I doubt it would have gotten that same applause had it been the original stage lyrics.

[–] StrongRex 14 years ago

Actually, looking back on the movie, I take back what I said about "Gee, Officer Krupke" not being a happy song. When I saw the movie for the first time, and since then, it's made clear that the Jets' intention was to make fun of the authorities and joke around (plus the laughing at the end). So it REALLY has no place after the rumble at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pq28qCklEHc

Watch that and tell me it's not a happy situation.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] StrongRex 14 years ago

Yes, but they still look like they're having fun in this scene. They're smiling, they're laughing at the jokes played in the song, and they're acting out the authority figures with improv. This is not a serious atmosphere, therefore it does not fit post-rumble.

That's why I took back what I said in my first post about it not being a happy song.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] StrongRex 14 years ago

Exactly. If "Officer Krupke" were a completely dark, serious number, I wouldn't have minded if it were after the rumble. I don't know what the writers were thinking when they were injecting comedy into a song that took place after Riff had just died.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] StrongRex 12 years ago

Being in Staten Island, my shows are always in danger of being “checked up on” by the agency Powers That Be, who are all located in NYC. As such, we pretty much toe the line as far as sticking to the script. If we were in the Midwest, we could probably get away with making little changes. I do know of a NJ group that did WSS, and it was practically a dupe of the film, placed onstage. How they got away with THAT, I don’t know. I doubt they had permission, because I called MTI (the licensing agent for WSS) and asked (begged really) permission to use the boys in AMERICA, and the rep on the phone was adamant – can’t do it. As I stated earlier, the one area where I didn’t back down was on making little modifications to some of the references in the lines, given the venue in which we were playing.

I know that sometimes when "Cool" and "Gee, Officer Krupke" are switched in the show like they are in the movie, they don't add Ice to the script; in fact they don't make Diesel the one to sing "Cool" even though he is supposedly Ice in the play. Instead, Diesel is the one out of control and Action is still the one taking charge and he is the one telling Diesel and the rest of the Jets to "play it cool." Guys, do you not realize that this is STILL out of character for Action? Get it right, why don't you!

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Sophitia36 13 years ago

I completely agree with the OP.
I haven't seen the play, but every change the movie has made makes perfect sense.

The fact that Bernstein and Laurent did not agree only shows that writers are often not the best judges of the quality of what they're doing...
I also heard that Tchaikovsky wasn't happy with The Nutcracker, and yet I really think it's his best work, much better than some of the very pompous stuff he's written.
I understand also that some people don't like to see their creations altered, but it's strange to think that they were unable to see how superior the new structure was. Even without having seen the play, I just feel that it would make no sense to have "I Feel Pretty" after the rumble (sheer torture as you said), or "Cool" before the rumble and "Officer Krupke" after.

[–] StrongRex 13 years ago

Thanks. I have seen the play (in fact, I was in it once), and seeing it makes it seem more out of place than reading it...and that's saying a lot.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] StrongRex 13 years ago

Seeing it last night, I stand by what I said about the stage version. Everything they did for the movie worked perfectly well and made sense. I cannot see it any other way, and I don't know how anyone else can either.

[–] stevenackerman69 13 years ago

Well, on stage more focus was on the song and dance material. When they did it for film, which is another medium, they could open it up and have more dialogue and characters who appear only once, like the angry guy in the alley that Action wants to fight.

[–] StrongRex 13 years ago

That's all well and good, but in my opinion the key to having a great show is having a great, solid story to tell. You can make the songs and dance numbers as good as you want them to be, but without great storytelling the show falls flat.

Now the movie had great songs and dance numbers AS WELL AS great storytelling. The music and dance in the stage show were amazing (most of the time), but there were many weak points in the story, as I mentioned before.

[–] dmnemaine 13 years ago

I think one of the main reasons for "Krupke" being performed by the Jets after the rumble is that it was felt there would be a need for a comic number as a tension reliever after the rumble scene. I happen to like the placement of "I Feel Pretty" after the rumble as well. It's a whole lot more poignant because the audience knows that Maria hasn't been awakened to reality yet. And that's the whole crux of "West Side Story" -- people not living in the reality that's happening around them. Tony and Maria fantasize about a happy life together that we know will never take place. The Puerto Ricans fantasize about a utopian America where all their dreams will come true. The Jets & Sharks fantasize about owning the streets, and don't realize the real ramifications of what the street war they're playing at (people die). Even the cops fantasize that they actually have some control over these street kids. The only one who can see things clearly is Doc, and nobody listens to him. Going back to "Krupke", even after the rumble, the Jets still haven't woken up to the reality of people being dead, and not coming back, and they're still playing their street war game. I think "Krupke" illustrates that perfectly. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that "Krupke" is a purposeful denying of reality by the Jets.

[–] StrongRex 13 years ago

You do raise some good points; in fact that's probably the best argument I've heard against my case. I do remember a friend of mine telling me that he was in a production of West Side Story, and the way they portrayed the "Officer Krupke" scene was showing them influenced on drugs. I suppose that works in a way.

A couple things though: Yes, the Shark GIRLS fantasize about a utopian America in both the play and the movie, but the Shark boys have already experienced America and woken up to its reality there, knowing their dreams are not likely to come true. Also, I think Lt. Schrank is aware that he doesn't have control over the gangs. He certainly tries to, and he succeeds with the Sharks, but he openly expressed anger and frustration when failing to find out from the Jets where the rumble was supposed to take place. And right after that, he says to Doc, "You try keeping hoodlums in line and see what it does to you."

With that said, I still think the "out for revenge" approach after the rumble works perfectly. And there's still the question of Action being out of character in the second act; I do not buy that radical of a change if there was nothing initially in his character leading up to it. He's just not the cool-headed leader type that the play said he was when they needed him to be.