And now, from the "Ring Wraiths on Parade" and Yahoo! News...

Sudiegirl sez:

Some stories are crying out to be made into musicals.

This is not one of them, in my opinion.

I know someone’s going to be angry that I dissed this theatrical endeavor, but you know what?

Come on now…what is it I always say, peoples? “MY BLOG, MY RULES!” And with that, I shall spelunk throughout the article.

Middle Earth musical divides critics
(“WITH THE SWORD OF RIGHTEOUSNESS!!!” Oops…sorry…)

By Jennifer Kwan
Fri Mar 24, 2:42 PM ET

The "Lord of the Rings" musical, touted as the most expensive stage production yet, met mixed reviews on Friday as critics applauded its leaping orcs and menacing dark riders, but got lost in the tangled plots of Middle Earth. (I love the word “touted”. I have images of the Disney White Rabbit from “Alice in Wonderland” blowing a horn and saying, “It’s COSTLY, I tells ya! It’s COSTLY!” And one question: do leaping orcs wear tights?)

The 55-strong cast slipped into 500 costumes and engaged in fight scenes and acrobatics atop a 40-ton, computer-controlled stage floor featuring 17 elevators, which spun and rose amid magic and illusion. (I thought elevators were amid weights and pulleys? Oh well, whatever. Also, if a cast of 55 people wore 500 costumes, that’d be approximately 9.09 costumes per person, in case you’re wondering…that is, if it’s evenly shared among everyone. Otherwise, somebody gets extra horns…)

For all the feverish activity at Toronto's Princess of Wales Theatre, the show based on J.R.R. Tolkien's epic trilogy drew only one standing ovation in more than three hours, but many in the audience called it breathtaking and spectacular. (Well…hmmm…was it breath-taking because the smoke machine caused several attacks of asphyxiation? Was it spectacular because there wasn’t very much on TV that night?)

The C$28 million ($24 million U.S.) show's technology was of little help to a "largely incomprehensible" musical version of Tolkien's masterpiece, said Ben Brantley of The New York Times, one of several out-of-town critics who flew to Toronto to see the show that is expected to move on to London and Broadway. (I'd be screamin' for a refund, but I guess that's why I do this instead of theater critiques...)

"Everyone and everything winds up lost in this ... adaptation of Tolkien's cult-inspiring trilogy of fantasy novels," Brantley said. "That includes plot, character and the patience of most ordinary theatergoers." (This is the first – and more than likely last – time I agree with a theater critic.)

Charles McNulty of the Los Angeles Times said, "Pity the production can't be judged exclusively on its design, it would be roundly considered a hit." (Well, come on now! “Miss Saigon” had a helicopter land on stage! “Les Miserables” had multiple explosions! They were hits, right? Why would this be any different? BTW, this is said with tongue firmly ensconsed in cheek.)

But he added that despite the show's shortcomings and desperate need to be cut, "The good news for investors is that commercially the project will surely pay off.” (The bad news – which was omitted – is that the payoff is with Monopoly money.)

'PARASITIC EXTRAVAGANZA'
(Eew…that’s a very odd way of phrasing it. It makes me itch. Anybody got Gold Bond? James Bond? Ward Bond? I got a million of 'em...)

"Riding the coattails of Peter Jackson's Oscar-winning movie trilogy with its global gross of $3 billion and counting, (But what about the orc body count? The number of hairy hobbit feet?) this kind of parasitic extravaganza (there’s that phrase again…my skin’s crawling…thanks a lot!)has a built-in audience. Today Toronto's Princess of Wales Theatre, tomorrow London's West End, followed by the rest of the premium-ticket-buying world." (And rest assured, I won’t be one of ‘em. I think I’d rather see a Wayland Flowers and Madame retrospective than this.)

Time magazine declared the show a "definitive megamusical" (Remind me to smack that Time reviewer too) while the Times of London branded it "A stirring triumph of theatrical magic." "With some fine tuning, this tale could hold its audience in total thrall," wrote the Times' Sam Marlowe. (Interesting…it defines, it stirs and it holds. Sounds like Tupperware!)

And even the Tolkien family was impressed. "I thought it was a beautiful show and I was impressed," said Rachel Tolkien, the author's granddaughter. "Everything in the book that to me is important, or really moved me, is on the stage," she told Reuters. (Notice how I am abstaining from making fun of anyone in this paragraph.)

Local critics were less enthused. (Ah, that’s more like it…give me your hatred.)

"'The Lord of the Rings' ... may boast of its record-breaking cost, but it still looks a lot like unfinished business," Toronto Globe and Mail critic Kamal Al-Solaylee said. "The blueprint for the adaptation, a heroic, if misguided, undertaking billed as a hybrid of drama, music and spectacle, is now in place. All it needs is an engaging storytelling approach, an emotional arc, credible performances and a more coherent musical score." (Wow…so many words to say, “It sucks.” I hope I gain control of my descriptive powers well enough to be a theater critic.)

The story follows Frodo Baggins, played by James Loye, and his quest to save Middle Earth by destroying the ring of power during three acts that take the audience through the dream-like and misty Mines of Moria, Forest of Fangorn and to the final battle at Mount Doom. (I’d just like to say this: THAT WAS ALL ONE SENTENCE!!! What’s up with that? I was told that is what’s called a “run-on” sentence. While this play does make me want to run on out of here, don’t you think the reporter needs to break things up a bit? I’m just sayin’.)

The show, which is scheduled to go to London in 2007, still has a lot to prove and much will depend on the next few months, said lead producer Kevin Wallace, formerly in-house producer with Andrew Lloyd Webber's London-based The Really Useful Group. (First, Mr. Wallace has never spoken truer words in his life. However, the name of Webber’s company should be changed to “The Slightly Less Useful Than Before, But We Have Nothing Better To Do” Group.)

Sudiegirl’s final opinion?

Let’s see…what other books can we make horrific musicals out of?

1. The Harry Potter series
2. King Kong
3. Any Jackie Collins/Jacqueline Susann/Danielle Steel novel
4. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
5. My 9th grade algebra book

Readers? Any other contributions?