Review: The Phoenix Theatre's "Next to Normal"

February 6, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The Phoenix Theatre’s production of “Next to Normal,” the Pulitzer-Prize-winning musical about the impact of a woman’s mental illness on herself and her family, is an earnest, unique curiosity, more admirable than affecting…at least, for me.

In talking to others who have seen this and the New York production of the show, I’ve come to realize that that it’s near impossible to predict who is going to buy into “Normal.”

Those whose families have struggled with mental illness? Some will find it simplified and irresponsible, others will see it as profound.

Therapists? Some are likely to be angry; other’s to say “it’s about time.”

Musical theater buffs? Some have it on a pedestal; other’s wonder why the characters seem to do little except sing at each other.

I could divide everyone I know into those who would or wouldn’t like “Cats” or “Ragtime” with a margin of error of maybe 5%. With “Next to Normal,” well, there’s no telling.

There are those deeply impacted by the torment-filled show and see its no heroes/no villains exploration of its serious subject as cause enough for praise. There are others for whom “Next to Normal” is little more than an exhausting angst-fest, in-your-face but with little to say. For them, it’s just as artificial as lighter musicals, only with a greater sense of self-importance.

I can’t speak for the Broadway production, but at the Phoenix, an uncertain tone, less-than-rocking orchestrations and an acceptable-but-not-exceptional cast accentuate instead of mask the show’s weaknesses. These include power ballads that may have been more impressive when diffused through a larger theater and backed by a stronger band, a subplot that doesn’t rise above “Afterschool Special” level, and a confused, would-be empowering ending that isn’t earned. I’d be more specific, but I’m trying to resist spoilers. Suffice it to say that if the writing, directing, and acting came together more often the way they do at the end of the first act—and if the overall impact was as sad and truthful as the way the lead character’s confusion heartbreakingly comes through in actress Emily Ristine’s eyes—“Next to Normal” would be a must see. For just about anyone.

Your thoughts?

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Next to Nevermind
    Thanks, Lou, for confirming my suspicion that this one wasn't worth attending. I almost saw it in NYC when it first opened, mainly because I have been a fan of Louis Hobson from back when he was in practically everything at the 5th Avenue Theatre in Seattle. I was really hoping to get to see him follow in Cheyenne Jackson's footsteps from Seattle to Broadway. After seeing the performance on the Tony Awards and reading more about the show, I opted for something less depressing. Sounds like I made the right choice. So, instead tonight it is opening night for 9 to 5 at Beef and Boards. Not a spectacular show to begin with, but at least I will leave happy.
    • worth attending
      Barbara, I never want to talk anyone out of going to see a show (okay, I did try to do that when Monopause: the Musical played the Athenaeum, but that was a special case). As I wrote, "Next to Normal" really speaks to some people. Your mileage may vary. Still, I'm glad that, if you aren't going, then you are opting to go to another show instead of resorting to TV.--Lou
    • I'd still give it a shot
      I swa Next to Normal at both Arena Stage in DC (when it was in its temporary Crystal City venue) and in NYC. You've aptly noted that it's tough to say who is going to really appreciate the show. I do think it is a more challenging production to do in a very small space. It's rock-oriented score filled with heavy ballads needs space to reverberate and dissipate. And because it essentially is an ensemble show, each cast member must really be firing on all cylinders for the experience to resonate. That said, it's not your typical musical and that alone is a reason that theatre lovers should check it out. It has a few gorgeous songs and explores issues not often found in a musical. Even if you don't love it, you'll find plenty to like.
    • Loved it!
      I saw Next To Normal on opening night and was thoroughly impressed with cast and the production as a whole. I'm going again this week and taking more people with me. I would urge everyone to go see this well done Pulitzer Prize winning musical!

    Post a comment to this blog

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    1. liek the rest of America

    2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

    3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

    4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

    5. whoa!

    ADVERTISEMENT