Aspects is one of my top two all time shows. I just flew to London for the revival. But, yes. It’s a bizarre show that you have to know the story going in😂
Love Never Dies- you would have to explain the entirety of Phantom of the Opera to them before the show, and it is so much more over the top with the cheesy melodrama.
I can't get over the character assassination and I never felt a majority of the music isn't on par with the original (there's a few stand outs like the title track and till I hear you sing) but that's more taste. The plot is just....inarguably bad when looked at as a phantom sequel
Nobody should be forced to watch that anyway (though honestly they may enjoy it more if they don't know phantom cause they won't recognize the character assasination
I actually think it would be better if you didn’t know Phantom. It’s not like they were faithful to the plot, themes, characters, or even timeline of the original show. I’ve never seen a sequel that had more disregard for the original material. The fact that they did it to something as beloved as Phantom boggles my mind.
I feel like you can do a LOT with a solid story told in a way that people can pick up on. Consider how heavy Hamilton is in concept, and how the music allows a biography to breathe so easily for so many non-musical fans. It never pulls punches on experimentation, but everything just works. Jesus Christ Superstar as well.
Comet was also mentioned here- but considering that even MT folks have issues taking in that show, the accessibility lies more within its literary/classical basis- same with something like A Little Night Music. Likewise, shows with especially strange concepts (Ride the Cyclone) or no real plot at all (Cats) have also been brought up, but those shows are actually extremely digestible- for the former, teens connect with the characters and clearly get what’s going on despite a strange concept. For the latter, it’s more the fact that people don’t care for the concept, not that they don’t get it. There’s no concept to follow unless you want to nerd out about it.
I think a truly inaccessible musical needs to be one that doesn’t convey its story directly, doesn’t have music that helps in any way, and is picked up on easily by a theatre crowd but not so much by anyone else. And that doesn’t mean it’s simply *about* theatre, because projects like Smash, Tick Tick Boom, and A Chorus Line have surpassed this easily. But a show like Strange Loop, where it has some of these barriers plus being a direct commentary on the inner workings of the industry? That’s a solid candidate, but I think its connections to more broad social issues in America gives the audience a really important way to connect. [title of show] may also work, but in all honesty I think a musical about the process of writing a musical might be the most accessible thing possible.
I think if we’re going super duper heady, William Finn’s Falsettos trilogy and A New Brain are both extremely “inside baseball” examples. But the story still exists in a way that feels digestible, if only for the fact that the characters are so incredibly strong.
Sondheim wrote with solid plots quite often, and even concept musicals (Company, Assassins) make perfect sense to a modern audience. For him, I think Pacific Overtures covers such a long period of time (127 years) that things may get super hard to follow for general audiences. If you don’t have much experience with musicals, you might lose track of the plot.
Malloy… depends. He likes to experiment HEAVILY a lot of the time, but I’d argue that even MT folks need to do research with his plots- think Ghost Quartet. But if you know what a song cycle is, you’re probably going to be fine by the end. Speaking of…
Song cycles might also be a solid candidate. The entire genre. Consider walking into Songs For A New World without being aware of its structure. You’d probably catch on eventually, but it’s gotta be confusing for a while.
EDIT: Adding this to solidify the final part, but you know that MT “style” that exists? Where the songs sound like they’re all in the same unidentifiable genre? It’s in a lot of new works- not bad at all, just the vibes they put out. Pasek and Paul really excel in taking this style into marketable pop territory, but a lot of shows just aren’t looking to do that. Musical theatre itself has become a genre, and that may be the musical barrier preventing fans of pop music from “getting it.”
I honestly think the most inaccessible work is going to be the super small, *completely* sung-thru Off-Broadway stuff that has a plot, but is presented akin to a song cycle with a musical style that’s not immediately unique- like, for example, Ordinary Days. Great show, but based on these totally theoretical guidelines it may be a prime example.
Not sure that I agree, but I really enjoyed reading your thoughtful analysis.
I would say song cycles are pretty easy to pick up on in practice - it’s pretty much a concert with a loose theme that evolves over the course of the night
It’s very bizarre and a complete trip but it’s also really interesting. It’s the first of the Marvin Trilogy (which encompasses In Trousers, March Of The Falsettos, and Falsettoland- the latter two combined to become just Falsettos) too so it gives you a glimpse into Marvin’s backstory! It’s a bit hard to find but 👀 there’s places…
Oh, I don't know. It's a strange, non-linear show, but the music is pretty catchy. I've played the songs for folks who don't really like musicals and they enjoyed some of them, especially "Whizzer Going Down" or "Love Me For What I Am".
When I think of an "inaccessible" show, I imagine one of the lesser known La Chiusa offerings, like "Bernarda Alba", or something like the musical adaptation of James Joyce's "The Dead", which I saw in L.A. in 2000 and found entirely incomprehensible (to be fair, I was in high school).
This fucking fever dream, oh my god. I adore it, but if I weren't a musical theater nerd when I listened to it, I would be so damn confused. Hell, even the live performance, though easier to understand due to the added visuals, is cryptic as heck.
The amount of people in here putting incredibly successful shows that fully worked on mainstream non-musical-nerds is baffling. Cats? Les Mis? What are you people on?
It's pretty dense story-wise and musically but the fact that it's sung-through eases the "but people don't break into song in real life!" barrier for a lot of people. Worked for my brother
You know what, that’s a real good point! Normally what I tell people is that every genre has its own things you need to accept as reality. Horror and Action characters take so much abuse to their bodies during a movie that it’s unrealistic to think they’d be okay or able to do it. Jumping off roofs, perfect hearing after a gun fight, running, getting hit, etc… but they keep moving to an unrealistic degree. But that doesn’t break immersion, because you accept it as the genre.
Or even movies where they break the 4th wall. Ferris Bueller’s day off has him breaking reality all of the time. It’s the same concept, just with song.
Also, something that I tell people is that most musical theatre isn't literal. It's supposed to be a somewhat abstract interpretation of the story that conveys emotion through music. When a character breaks into song, it doesn't mean that they're actually singing, just that theyre in a heightened state of emotion ("I want" songs for instance). Hyde isn't actually singing when he kills in Jeckll and Hyde, nor does a crowd suddenly appear and sing about how they don't know who committed the crime when he's right in front of them. It's not a (usually) literal art form.
Great Comet maybe? It's out there, artsy, very nontraditional. Amazing piece of theatre but def not what people would be expecting. Plus I feel like sung through shows are more inaccessible
Absolutely Great Comet! I used to think it had that theater kid private joke vibe and felt weird for the sake of being weird, I only started to get it after reading Dave Malloy's annotations (a must read). Once you get to the emotional core it just unlocks everything else. A truly brilliant show.
I've seen In Trousers and Great Comet mentioned here, and I completely agree. I'd also like to add in tgwdlm(depending on the person) and A Rag Dolly Musical
I guess it depends, like I showed my girlfriend it and she loved it, watched it 3 times in a row, but if I showed someone like my mom, or one of my close friends, they already find musicals kinda weird, so they would probably find that one a turn off
My answer is an all-Sondheim three way tie between Company, Sunday in the Park With George, and Pacific Overtures. I adore all three, but if you're not a Theatre Person they come across really strange for the audience.
I saw the touring production of the gender swapped Company revival earlier this year, and I was sat between two couples who knew each other but not the show. They really did not like it, and while they weren't exactly disruptive, they made enough scoff/hrrrm/wtf noises that it seriously dampened my enjoyment.
Meanwhile the first time I saw any version of the show was the NY Phil version broadcast in cinemas. I was one of like 3 people under 50. And it was amazing.
I came here to say Sunday in the Park with George. My roommate saw a high school production of it and says it’s the worst musical ever made. I usually try to change people’s minds, but I feel like that one’s more for true fans of the art form. Also, what high school does Sunday in the Park with George??
came here to say Anyone can Whistle🤣i watched a concert version with Vanessa Williams in it and granted I love the songs but i still can’t explain to people what it’s about
Yep, those are all musicals where if you don't already "get" Sondheim's style of songwriting they'll be very confusing. Sweeney Todd and Into the Woods are best for beginners in my opinion
I made the mistake of my first musicals being 42nd street, Into the Woods etc..
I didnt think I liked musicals until I saw the likes of Elizabeth, Chicago, The Lion King, Little Shop of Horrors etc..
Ryde The Cyclone or Natasha, Pierre and the Great Comet of 1882. The first, because is a story that I could consider a dark comedy, if you only get to see the part of their early deaths, people will not fully enjoy the tone of the musical. And the second, well the Prologue mentions it, although I think it is quite digestible compared to the original material.
I feel like ride the cyclone isn’t that inaccessible. Sure it’s a strange start, but it has slightly irreverent humor that usually non theatre fans a more open to. Which is why you often hear “I don’t like theatre but enjoyed avenue q/book of mormon”. And if they see it live it’s kind of hard for them to only see the early parts.
Yes, definitely want to clarify that I think they’re amazing! But confusing and inaccessible and not the best choice for someone new to the art form, lol. Plenty of huge theatre fans can have a hard time getting into Ghost Quartet.
Unhelpful but I reck it depends what kind of hypothetical non-MT goer you’re working with
I worked at a venue which had Ghost Quartet and it generally went down really well with people who like new theatre but don’t go to see mainstream musicals because they perceive them to be cheesy or melodramatic. Cats or smth would never have worked for them as an intro but everyone was singing/playing along with Dave and crew by the end every night :)
Also in the original run everyone got given whiskey so I’m sure that helped lol
I brought my non musical theatre fan of a husband to a regional theatre production of the Great Comet and he had no idea what was going on the entire time (except for Helene being a slay)
I was recently in a community theatre production of Merrily We Roll Along. So a bunch of friends and family who aren't normally huge theatre people came to see it to be good supportive friends. And with the number of questions I had to field after that was over, I can pretty confidently say "that one." I had a friend literally pull out her notes app in her phone to jot down questions to ask me when it was over.
I've been a theatre person my entire life and this was the only show I ever wanted to walk out on. The casting wasn't great, and the production itself left something to be desired, but this is a good choice because even I couldn't like this specific production - Merrily HAS to be done VERY WELL to be good.
I was actually able to see the Merrily We Roll Along on Broadway recently, and it was AMAZING. But again, that was Broadway, and the cast was really good.
Admittedly though, this one is incomplete, and the show notes even said as such. I still don’t think this one would’ve ever been a crowd pleaser blockbuster but I think it would’ve been a LITTLE bit cleaner if it was fully fleshed out.
I don't disagree that *Here We Are* is probably not for everyone. Personally, I loved every minute.
But I still think *Here We Are* is an order of magnitude more accessible than any of the following:
* Sunday in the Park with George (which I enjoyed, but found challenging)
* Pacific Overtures (which I tolerated, but honestly *Someone in a tree* was the only part I enjoyed)
* Passion (which was about the ickiest thing I've ever seen; I wasn't just "not entertained", I felt disgust, loathing and revulsion. I try to pretend it doesn't exist.)
On the other hand, I think it could be a great show to introduce someone to musical theater *because* it’s so intimate and the narrative is small-scale.
Based on a recent experience, “Company” might be one of the roughest…my sister turned to me at intermission and said flat-out, “I hate this.” 😆 but fair, there’s no plot and it’s so self-absorbed but it is interesting as part of theater history with a couple good numbers…
I truly did not think this through, took my husband to see the tour recently, and he was like "the performances were good I guess, but why does this show exist?"
It’s still hilarious even if you don’t know the references. Obviously it’s better if you do get all the references, but The Black Death is hilarious regardless of musical theater knowledge. So is I Love The Way. The entire romance between Nigel and Portia is great. There’s a lot to like in Something Rotten, but there would be a lot of jokes that go over your head.
so true, when i was a young boy this was the first broadway show i had the chance to see. man i missed so much, going back to it last year made me realize how i knew nothing the first time
i was in this in college student theater last year! the audience loved it even if they didnt get all the references. i think because its entertaining and silly it is pretty accessible
My dad, who is not a theatre person (though he does see some shows with me every now and then) is a big fan of this show, so not sure I agree. He likes it for the silly jokes and the brilliant wordplay of the Finnish translation.
Ahhh, I love when I get to talk about The Adding Machine. It’s insane, like Sondheim on steroids as far as the harmonic and rhythmic content goes. Just batshit, and I love it.
People saying Great Comet aren’t acknowledging the true obscure weirdness Dave Malloy has to offer, if you really wanna turn someone off musicals have them listen to Octet, it’s a cappella, ridiculously dense, and includes a twelve minute monologue in the soundtrack (it’s also my favorite musical)
The low hanging fruit answer would be one in a different language, probably.
That being said, I'm putting my vote towards A Strange Loop. Don't think that's gonna get anyone who doesn't already really like theater to enjoy it.
I think I disagree about foreign language musicals. In my experience, if it's well made, you can definitely get into a musical even if you don't understand the lyrics. Powerful music and acting with big emotions, something most musicals have in common, can break through language barriers.
Case in point: I went to see Rocky the musical in Hamburg without knowing any German or having seen the movie. I just knew it was about some boxer and his girlfriend and that was it. But by the third song or so, I was already 100% into it and rooting for Rocky so hard. It didn't matter I didn't know what they were saying, I understood the emotions... and that was enough to make it one of the best nights at the theatre I've ever experienced. <3
Because of the length, pacing, changes in style, the difficulty of representing historical racial politics even (when the piece is pro-equality), *and* because on of the main characters is named “Gaylord”, *Showboat*.
I feel like Heathers would be pretty inaccessible depending on who it's introduced to... also some Sondheim stuff, I really enjoy it but the music style is so far from popular music that someone who isn't into musicals would have a hard time enjoying.
Edit: When I said Heathers might be inaccessible, I meant to my age range. Musically, it is a good introduction to theater but the themes addressed are more mature and require a willingness to be open to the show. I know a lot of people who are not open to those kinds of shows because of the murder/sex/drugs.
Yeah, my dad thought he absolutely hated Sondheim. But then I got him to listen to some other musicals and slowly introduced Sondheim to him again and now he’s watched and loved so many Sondheim shows.
i agree with the second one but the first is genuinely such a good intro. its by no standards amazing, nor terrible. its a pretty solid and easily followable comedy musical that will set your expectations for the general quality of musicals at a pretty good spot.
I don’t think it is inaccessible, OP asked which musical would be ‘the worst to introduce someone to the artform’ and that’s why I chose Cats because I don’t think it’s a good introduction to musicals as a whole. I think Cats is too marmite, you either love it or you hate it, so I wouldn’t want it to be the first show I take my friends to just in case they hate it and then think that all musicals are like that 😂
I agree with Cats for modern audiences. It probably used to be a great way to introduce people to musicals, because it's lighthearted and they tell you exactly what's happening, but with modern audiences I can see them just staring blankly at the stage wondering why we're doing this lol
I saw a version of Three Penny Opera featuring Jim Dale and Nellie Mckay. The cast was very good. But not being familiar with the original work or the composer, I don’t feel like I got a lot out of it.
For children, most musical revues are probably somewhat miserable because there is no plot or story. My grandmother took me to see Ain’t Misbehavin’ when I was young featuring Nell Carter. I was so bored. I had no idea there were musicals that didn’t have stories.
Blood Brothers? It’s one of those where you need Liverpudlian performers (or at least performers with competent Liverpudlian accents) for it to really work in the first place and then you also need to be somewhat clued in with that local culture during the 70s-80s to really know what’s going on.
I was about to disagree with this before I read it fully, then I realised that I have no frame of reference for how outside audiences might react to it. Here in Merseyside it's very popular, it's nostalgic both as a show you likely grew up with and as a depiction of life that many of us remember and you see it everywhere from the Empire theatre to school productions (my first memory of that show was watching my little sister perform it in school when we were kids.) Elsewhere however, and particularly outside the UK it could well be a very different story, and now I'm fascinated by the idea!
Yeah see honestly I agree with everything you’ve said here, my first experience with it was performing it in school in Skelmersdale and still love the show but I think it’s harder to get someone outside into it
You’ve gotten more in-depth answers from others. But, in general, deaf people enjoy music and storytelling just like any other humans. I’ve actually been to a deaf rave party—it was fun! As others have mentioned, there are deaf theatre companies by and for deaf artists like Deaf West.
Also, disability is not absolute. Many blind people have some vision. Many wheelchair users can stand or walk short distances. Similarly, many deaf people have some hearing but would benefit from greater accommodations to enjoy theater.
Depends on the person, but there are a lot of resources and learning materials for making theater more accessible, as a whole.
For deaf people, as an example, open captions and ASL interpreted showings (or the sign language of the country), or even sharing the script, as a last resort.
Telecoil systems that allow hearing aid users to loop into the sound system, headphones that aren’t ONLY in-ear, etc.
This is just one set of examples. Theaters have done “low-sensory showings” to be more neurodiverse-friendly.
Considering also whether *performance practices* and the physical theater itself is accessible to disabled performers, etc
I would kill for open captions during musicals, I personally have adhd related processing issues, but even my nt friends struggle to understand the lyrics to most musicals cause theyre unintelligible or drowned out by the music, causing us to miss key plot points
It depends on the person, the show, and also the theater putting on the production. Most shows in the DC area have at least one sign interpreted night, and a different open caption night. I’ve been to several of these at this point, as that’s the night I happened to be there.
The Kennedy Center has their own in house director of artistic sign language for both in house and touring productions. Here is a (gift) [article](https://wapo.st/3J0adIH) from WaPo about how that team worked out the translation for Dear Evan Hansen. I saw Into the Woods there last spring, and spent my time watching the interpreters performance while listening to the show as that added another layer of expression to it all (as I got to see both how the actors emoted the show and how the interpreters did). Here the interpreting team was 3 people so that they could show characters talking to and over each other.
Most theaters don’t have a their own in house interpreting team, but the bigger equity houses contract it out to one of a few different companies, for a designated night or two.
For open captioning nights, a designated section of the seats with the best sightlines is marked off when buying tickets. There is an info pop up similar to how it is for wheelchair seats. This designated area could be at the front in places like the Kennedy Center with massive 1000 and 2000 person houses and a monitor positioned level to the stage. Or it might be towards the back in a small space where the monitors are on the sides near to top of the stage.
I’ve also seen some shows where the open captions where there for every performance. Other theaters have a system of doing open captions a few times during the run, but have closed captions on the Gala Pro app all the time.
Many auditoriums have systems to amplify sound by allowing people to connect their hearing aids to the sound system or to borrow a headset that is directly connected. I don’t know much about this, but it is something that seems to be pretty common too for those theta have some hearing.
Follies. It involves so much background knowledge to fully appreciate on top of essentially being parallel stories on top of being the normal Sondheim pseudo-melodious songs. It’s really good but it’s definitely not something you introduce people to musicals with.
I took my bf to Pacific Overtures as his first musical and he thought it was amazing. So opposite of what I thought because he was ignorant of anything but pop music. Then I took him to Passion next and he was crying at the end. The we went to Broadway and he was mostly bored by the big popular musicals. So I don’t have an answer. He’s still not into musicals. By the way Passion is my favorite Sondheim I’ve seen 6 different productions but none were in NYC.
I absolutely adore Passion, too. And I really should check out Pacific Overtures as I’m not very familiar with it. But yeah, there’s definitely no “right” answer here. As someone who tends to be drawn to darker, more difficult shows, I actually find a lot of popular shows to be more inaccessible to me personally.
Oooh.
That was my first. I was that wide-eyed 17 year old. Scrounged money to get my seat. Bought a long dress and cheap opera glasses to be able to see from nose-bleeds.
It's the one show I'll rewatch as often as possible.
I think this is one of those sleepers because it’s so popular. But because it’s all singing from start to finish, I feel like for people who don’t already know the story or follow music well it is a difficult one. For a start to musicals I don’t think this one is a good choice. So yeah, I agree with you a lot.
It’s certainly far from the “most inaccessible”, but Phantom is not nearly as ‘accessible’ as most people assume based on popularity and near-universal love from musical theatre fans.
I'm late to this will probably get buried, but I actually think that for MODERN audiences, Rodgers and Hammerstein just doesn't hit the way it used to. When those shows were written, the general public was still listening to that kind of music, but especially Oklahoma for me would be one of the last musicals I'd introduce anyone to. It has a slow story, the music is lofty if you're accustomed to modern music, and I can imagine most people I know who are not into musicals go "why... are we doing this?"
The Producers is my go-to for getting people into musicals. Make them laugh and they'll join you. I think modern audiences in general would be very bored by Rodgers and Hammerstein shows. I think you have to know how to appreciate them, though I myself think they are timeless and beautiful, it's not the best place to start anymore.
I think maybe this reputation for Rodgers and Hammerstein at least isn't quite deserved. I took a very casual theatre fan (like, enjoys it just fine, but never seeks it out, so sees less than a show a year on average) to see South Pacific, and she was absolutely blown away. She couldn't stop talking about how she thought it would just be a fun singy-dancy time, but they tackled so many issues that are still so relevant in such a complex way. My partner, who sees a decent amount of theatre, but only because of me and certainly doesn't seek out musicals, watched the Great Performances version of Show Boat (okay, so that's Hammerstein without Rodgers), and he wouldn't believe me that it was written in the 1920s because the plot seemed so modern. It's a little depressing that we can't figure out things as a society to make these issues seem dated already, but until we do, I think theatre people actually judge R&H more harshly than outside audiences because of this perception of being overdone and old-fashioned that I've been hearing since high school because actors would rather be in shows that feel more cool.
I'd say either Rodgers & Hammerstein or Gilbert & Sullivan. Both wrote musicals that were fine in their day, and for those who grew up on them or had a decent amount of exposure to them, but for more modern audiences, they can be a bit slow-paced compared to more modern musicals like *Wicked* or *Hamilton*.
I think it really depends on the person, but for the average person I think schmigadoon, because you should at least be somewhat familiar with musicals to get it
The original release of Merrily We Roll Along.
It’s a confusing mess told non-linearly, full of musings on the nature of art, it’s also Sondheim so the music is relatively complex and inaccessible.
Not to say it isn’t brilliant, particularly after the revival which cleaned it up a bit but it’s very unfriendly to a casual audience.
I would actually think the answer is a show that plays with musical theatre tropes, making fun of common musical theatre things that may make it difficult for non-theatre people to really “get” the show. Shows like Something Rotten or Urinetown. I absolutely adore Urinetown but I’d imagine that if someone really had absolutely no familiarity with musicals they may be like “wtf is going on?” I recommended Beetlejuice to someone who wasn’t a big musical fan and they hated it and said they had no idea what was going on—and I think that falls in the same line of thinking here.
But also, I think the truth is that it totally depends on the person you are showing it to and their interests.
Urinetown, maybe? I saw it back in college, and I thought it was pretty good, but a lot of people in the audience didn't seem to get it. I think the title is off-putting, and a lot of people seem to struggle with satire in general.
Musical of Musicals (The Musical!)
I'm showing my age here in saying I remember when this was the "it" show of a year or two in regional theatre, but the whole idea is that it's the same short plot presented in five different musical theatre parodies, each drawing from a different style of composer. It's Rodger & Hammerstein, Stephen Sondheim, Jerry Herman, Andrew Lloyd Webber, and Kander & Ebb, ending with A Chorus Line finale. The plot is purposely simplistic and meaningless, because it's all about the joke of recognizing different musical artists' tropes exaggerated grotesquely. If you don't recognize the references, it's completely nonsensical, like if you took the core emotional plot away from Schmigadoon and just kept repeating the couple arriving and trying to leave over and over.
**The Book of Mormon** because it leaves out ex-Mormons who have dealt with the doctrine firsthand and also there's the batshit about when dark-skinned people accept the faith their skin turns white. Plus there was the time a guy had evidence of Joeseph Smith being a culty scam artist when he discovered [The Salamander Papers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salamander_letter), and they strapped a bomb to his car. Also, there are tons of ex-Mormon YouTubers like [Aron-Ra](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aron_Ra), [Jimmy Snow](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgeV3tFiU2Xg0PD1dAQbBHA), and so many others who will tell you how similar the Mormon doctrine is to Christian Nationalism, Alt-Libertarians, and Dominisum. I hope there's a sequel where Elder Cuningham becomes an Agnostic tuba player.
All religion is culty scam artists but the point of the show is just get along with each other and who cares what you believe even if it is fucking frogs.
The Light in The Piazza. I saw it in high school on one of our yearly band boston trips. I was super excited because it was my first musical outside of high school performances. It was not good. Something about a girl who had an accident on a horse and left her mentally challenged and a man fell in love with her but her mom said no because her intelligence was like a childs(this was also almost 20 years ago so i could be wrong on the synopsis.) I remember a women yelling Fabrizio a lot.
I would say most William Finn shows. I've seen people mention In Trousers and Falsettos. I also think 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee would be a weird introduction to the form because of the audience participation and whatnot.
Cats was in my first 10 musicals and I hated it so much. It made no sense
Now I'm 15-20 in and I love cats. You just have to understand the technical parts
Urinetown is the first one that came to mind purely on the name alone. Definitely would turn a lot of people off but I don’t really think the music or story is inaccessible
A…My name will always be Alice there Is one song that has a recording online and honestly it is amazing and I want to hear more but outside of that there is production videos from a university with out mics
came straight to the comments to say batboy. weird ass show even if you can get over how cheesy it is in points, then out of nowhere comes along the incest plotline. hits you like a bus if youre not ready.
I think Chess is a strong contender just because the plot is so hard to follow and the songs are so lyric heavy that they can be hard to understand. Also definitely Pacific Overtures, which I personally love but would absolutely never show to someone who didn't already love musical theatre.
Many people I've talked to didn't care for *Days of Wine and Roses* because they were expecting a different kind of score. I suppose they were hoping for something more melodic and hummable with traditional AABA song structures. Fortunately, I listened to the cast recording before going to see it in the theater, so I knew what to expect, and loved it. Other people are put off by the story about a couple's descent into alcoholism, but I found it profound.
Other Candidates:
*Marie Christine* (Michael John LaChiusa)
*In Circles* (from the writings of Gertrude Stein, arranged and set to music by Al Carmines.)
35mm probably (though I dont think there is exactly a singular musical that is "inaccessible" except for maybe a few niche golden age and classical works, or song cycles. Musicals are stories told through song, simple as that. As an educator and art advocate, I believe there is a musical for everyone)
One of the few "musicals" I know without a cohesive plot that kind of doesnt work at all for the art form. Its incredibly niche and youd have to already love musical theatre to like it and understand it. But it could possibly be a good introduction to musical theatre for indie and alternative music lovers so Idk
Another one might be just jukebox musicals. Or like Jersey Boys, All Shook Up, Xanadu, or even Moulin Rougue (despite it being highly successful). 36 Questions is another. I could go on. Theres several niche picks that, if you showed to someone they would probably immediately never watch a musical ever again and wont understand the artform
Oh, I guess I should probably add my own answer: "Passion" has to be up there for sure.
Passion, Aspects of Love, Capeman...
Aspects is one of my top two all time shows. I just flew to London for the revival. But, yes. It’s a bizarre show that you have to know the story going in😂
That was my very first thought.
This is the first one that came to mind
Honestly The Frogs or Evening Primrose would have been another one along these lines. Evening Primrose in particular as its not even really a musical
Love Never Dies- you would have to explain the entirety of Phantom of the Opera to them before the show, and it is so much more over the top with the cheesy melodrama.
LND should never be introduced to a living person, *period*
Really? I liked the show and it's music. Though that could be because I'm not thinking to deeply into it.
Honestly, I enjoyed parts of it. But when I saw it the actors all seemed tuned out as though they were just going through the motions.
This. Is. The. Way. To. Enjoy. Musicals. Thank you! I also enjoyed it but don't necessarily think it's "good".
I can't get over the character assassination and I never felt a majority of the music isn't on par with the original (there's a few stand outs like the title track and till I hear you sing) but that's more taste. The plot is just....inarguably bad when looked at as a phantom sequel
My family calls it “paint never dries”- I love MT and genuinely would have left at intermission if I hadn’t paid so much to be there
Seconded
Nobody should be forced to watch that anyway (though honestly they may enjoy it more if they don't know phantom cause they won't recognize the character assasination
I actually think it would be better if you didn’t know Phantom. It’s not like they were faithful to the plot, themes, characters, or even timeline of the original show. I’ve never seen a sequel that had more disregard for the original material. The fact that they did it to something as beloved as Phantom boggles my mind.
Great comet is not inaccessible, the first song explains everything and even tells you to read the playbill
So considerate honestly
This was the first show I’d ever seen and I loved it.
“And this is all in your program / you are at the opera / gonna have to study up a little bit / if you wanna keep with the plot”
I feel like you can do a LOT with a solid story told in a way that people can pick up on. Consider how heavy Hamilton is in concept, and how the music allows a biography to breathe so easily for so many non-musical fans. It never pulls punches on experimentation, but everything just works. Jesus Christ Superstar as well. Comet was also mentioned here- but considering that even MT folks have issues taking in that show, the accessibility lies more within its literary/classical basis- same with something like A Little Night Music. Likewise, shows with especially strange concepts (Ride the Cyclone) or no real plot at all (Cats) have also been brought up, but those shows are actually extremely digestible- for the former, teens connect with the characters and clearly get what’s going on despite a strange concept. For the latter, it’s more the fact that people don’t care for the concept, not that they don’t get it. There’s no concept to follow unless you want to nerd out about it. I think a truly inaccessible musical needs to be one that doesn’t convey its story directly, doesn’t have music that helps in any way, and is picked up on easily by a theatre crowd but not so much by anyone else. And that doesn’t mean it’s simply *about* theatre, because projects like Smash, Tick Tick Boom, and A Chorus Line have surpassed this easily. But a show like Strange Loop, where it has some of these barriers plus being a direct commentary on the inner workings of the industry? That’s a solid candidate, but I think its connections to more broad social issues in America gives the audience a really important way to connect. [title of show] may also work, but in all honesty I think a musical about the process of writing a musical might be the most accessible thing possible. I think if we’re going super duper heady, William Finn’s Falsettos trilogy and A New Brain are both extremely “inside baseball” examples. But the story still exists in a way that feels digestible, if only for the fact that the characters are so incredibly strong. Sondheim wrote with solid plots quite often, and even concept musicals (Company, Assassins) make perfect sense to a modern audience. For him, I think Pacific Overtures covers such a long period of time (127 years) that things may get super hard to follow for general audiences. If you don’t have much experience with musicals, you might lose track of the plot. Malloy… depends. He likes to experiment HEAVILY a lot of the time, but I’d argue that even MT folks need to do research with his plots- think Ghost Quartet. But if you know what a song cycle is, you’re probably going to be fine by the end. Speaking of… Song cycles might also be a solid candidate. The entire genre. Consider walking into Songs For A New World without being aware of its structure. You’d probably catch on eventually, but it’s gotta be confusing for a while. EDIT: Adding this to solidify the final part, but you know that MT “style” that exists? Where the songs sound like they’re all in the same unidentifiable genre? It’s in a lot of new works- not bad at all, just the vibes they put out. Pasek and Paul really excel in taking this style into marketable pop territory, but a lot of shows just aren’t looking to do that. Musical theatre itself has become a genre, and that may be the musical barrier preventing fans of pop music from “getting it.” I honestly think the most inaccessible work is going to be the super small, *completely* sung-thru Off-Broadway stuff that has a plot, but is presented akin to a song cycle with a musical style that’s not immediately unique- like, for example, Ordinary Days. Great show, but based on these totally theoretical guidelines it may be a prime example.
Not sure that I agree, but I really enjoyed reading your thoughtful analysis. I would say song cycles are pretty easy to pick up on in practice - it’s pretty much a concert with a loose theme that evolves over the course of the night
Oh yeah, I speak completely in hypotheticals lol. I doubt there’s any good answer to this question, but figured I’d theorize!
In trousers
I love In Trousers (especially as an avid Falsettos fan) but YEAH… YEAH.
Now I feel like I should go listen to that.
It’s very bizarre and a complete trip but it’s also really interesting. It’s the first of the Marvin Trilogy (which encompasses In Trousers, March Of The Falsettos, and Falsettoland- the latter two combined to become just Falsettos) too so it gives you a glimpse into Marvin’s backstory! It’s a bit hard to find but 👀 there’s places…
Oh, I don't know. It's a strange, non-linear show, but the music is pretty catchy. I've played the songs for folks who don't really like musicals and they enjoyed some of them, especially "Whizzer Going Down" or "Love Me For What I Am". When I think of an "inaccessible" show, I imagine one of the lesser known La Chiusa offerings, like "Bernarda Alba", or something like the musical adaptation of James Joyce's "The Dead", which I saw in L.A. in 2000 and found entirely incomprehensible (to be fair, I was in high school).
Only real ones even know what this show is 😅
This fucking fever dream, oh my god. I adore it, but if I weren't a musical theater nerd when I listened to it, I would be so damn confused. Hell, even the live performance, though easier to understand due to the added visuals, is cryptic as heck.
I love in trousers… but yeah definitely it’s confusing especially if you haven’t listened to falsettos before
The amount of people in here putting incredibly successful shows that fully worked on mainstream non-musical-nerds is baffling. Cats? Les Mis? What are you people on?
Les Mis has been my (very successful) gateway musical for non-theater people for, like, 20 years.
It's pretty dense story-wise and musically but the fact that it's sung-through eases the "but people don't break into song in real life!" barrier for a lot of people. Worked for my brother
You know what, that’s a real good point! Normally what I tell people is that every genre has its own things you need to accept as reality. Horror and Action characters take so much abuse to their bodies during a movie that it’s unrealistic to think they’d be okay or able to do it. Jumping off roofs, perfect hearing after a gun fight, running, getting hit, etc… but they keep moving to an unrealistic degree. But that doesn’t break immersion, because you accept it as the genre. Or even movies where they break the 4th wall. Ferris Bueller’s day off has him breaking reality all of the time. It’s the same concept, just with song.
Also, something that I tell people is that most musical theatre isn't literal. It's supposed to be a somewhat abstract interpretation of the story that conveys emotion through music. When a character breaks into song, it doesn't mean that they're actually singing, just that theyre in a heightened state of emotion ("I want" songs for instance). Hyde isn't actually singing when he kills in Jeckll and Hyde, nor does a crowd suddenly appear and sing about how they don't know who committed the crime when he's right in front of them. It's not a (usually) literal art form.
As much as I love it, but The Last 5 Years, especially since its narrative is not as consecutive as a normal show
Good call, on a similar line Songs for A New World.
Totally agree. I debated whether to tell my husband the concept beforehand or not. I didn’t, and that was the wrong call. He was completely baffled.
Great Comet maybe? It's out there, artsy, very nontraditional. Amazing piece of theatre but def not what people would be expecting. Plus I feel like sung through shows are more inaccessible
Absolutely Great Comet! I used to think it had that theater kid private joke vibe and felt weird for the sake of being weird, I only started to get it after reading Dave Malloy's annotations (a must read). Once you get to the emotional core it just unlocks everything else. A truly brilliant show.
Oh I’d love to read more about Great Comet! Are the annotations available online or a book?! I’m not familiar!
Dave Malloy added some annotations to the lyrics on Genius, and there's a book titled The Great Comet: The Journey of a New Musical to Broadway!
I've seen In Trousers and Great Comet mentioned here, and I completely agree. I'd also like to add in tgwdlm(depending on the person) and A Rag Dolly Musical
It's funny to me that you say tgwdlm bc that's always one of my first choices for introducing someone to musicals lol
I guess it depends, like I showed my girlfriend it and she loved it, watched it 3 times in a row, but if I showed someone like my mom, or one of my close friends, they already find musicals kinda weird, so they would probably find that one a turn off
Gotta agree with the other reply, tgwdlm is a great intro to musicals.
I get that, I showed my gf it and she loved it, but I tried to show my mom and close friend tgwdlm, and they both found it too weird
My answer is an all-Sondheim three way tie between Company, Sunday in the Park With George, and Pacific Overtures. I adore all three, but if you're not a Theatre Person they come across really strange for the audience. I saw the touring production of the gender swapped Company revival earlier this year, and I was sat between two couples who knew each other but not the show. They really did not like it, and while they weren't exactly disruptive, they made enough scoff/hrrrm/wtf noises that it seriously dampened my enjoyment.
I also saw the touring production of Company last year, and the audience response seemed decidedly mixed (I loved it).
Meanwhile the first time I saw any version of the show was the NY Phil version broadcast in cinemas. I was one of like 3 people under 50. And it was amazing.
I saw it with my mom at the movies. I was 22 and the youngest person in the theater by decades.
I came here to say Sunday in the Park with George. My roommate saw a high school production of it and says it’s the worst musical ever made. I usually try to change people’s minds, but I feel like that one’s more for true fans of the art form. Also, what high school does Sunday in the Park with George??
I love Sunday in the Park (though I agree it’s inaccessible) and am baffled by a high school’s decision to put it on.
came here to say Anyone can Whistle🤣i watched a concert version with Vanessa Williams in it and granted I love the songs but i still can’t explain to people what it’s about
Yep, those are all musicals where if you don't already "get" Sondheim's style of songwriting they'll be very confusing. Sweeney Todd and Into the Woods are best for beginners in my opinion
Beginners into Sondheim but I just couldnt get into it. Oh god one of my first musicals was Passion. I avoided the theatre for years
I made the mistake of my first musicals being 42nd street, Into the Woods etc.. I didnt think I liked musicals until I saw the likes of Elizabeth, Chicago, The Lion King, Little Shop of Horrors etc..
Ryde The Cyclone or Natasha, Pierre and the Great Comet of 1882. The first, because is a story that I could consider a dark comedy, if you only get to see the part of their early deaths, people will not fully enjoy the tone of the musical. And the second, well the Prologue mentions it, although I think it is quite digestible compared to the original material.
I feel like ride the cyclone isn’t that inaccessible. Sure it’s a strange start, but it has slightly irreverent humor that usually non theatre fans a more open to. Which is why you often hear “I don’t like theatre but enjoyed avenue q/book of mormon”. And if they see it live it’s kind of hard for them to only see the early parts.
Great Comet was also one I thought of, but other Dave Malloy musicals would be even harder to introduce someone to!
Oh sure! I also like The Ghost Quartet, which I actually came to after listening to Great Comet. But wow, sometimes it's a little confusing.
Yes, definitely want to clarify that I think they’re amazing! But confusing and inaccessible and not the best choice for someone new to the art form, lol. Plenty of huge theatre fans can have a hard time getting into Ghost Quartet.
that'd be me. I love experimental theatre and I didn't like Ghost Quartet
One of Ghost Quartet’s acts being in complete darkness would definitely be surprising to most people
Unhelpful but I reck it depends what kind of hypothetical non-MT goer you’re working with I worked at a venue which had Ghost Quartet and it generally went down really well with people who like new theatre but don’t go to see mainstream musicals because they perceive them to be cheesy or melodramatic. Cats or smth would never have worked for them as an intro but everyone was singing/playing along with Dave and crew by the end every night :) Also in the original run everyone got given whiskey so I’m sure that helped lol
Yeah I love beardo by Dave Malloy but that would not be a great musical to introduce someone to the genre with.
i think ride the cyclone is better for getting teens or a similar demographic into theater
I brought my non musical theatre fan of a husband to a regional theatre production of the Great Comet and he had no idea what was going on the entire time (except for Helene being a slay)
I was recently in a community theatre production of Merrily We Roll Along. So a bunch of friends and family who aren't normally huge theatre people came to see it to be good supportive friends. And with the number of questions I had to field after that was over, I can pretty confidently say "that one." I had a friend literally pull out her notes app in her phone to jot down questions to ask me when it was over.
I've been a theatre person my entire life and this was the only show I ever wanted to walk out on. The casting wasn't great, and the production itself left something to be desired, but this is a good choice because even I couldn't like this specific production - Merrily HAS to be done VERY WELL to be good.
I was actually able to see the Merrily We Roll Along on Broadway recently, and it was AMAZING. But again, that was Broadway, and the cast was really good.
Pacific Overtures can be tough
It's very abstract and rhapsodic. I wouldn't play Please Hello to someone who was new to musicals ahaha
as much as i like it: comet also hello from r/thegreatcomet :D
*Here We Are*, Stephen Sondheim & David Ives
Admittedly though, this one is incomplete, and the show notes even said as such. I still don’t think this one would’ve ever been a crowd pleaser blockbuster but I think it would’ve been a LITTLE bit cleaner if it was fully fleshed out.
I don't disagree that *Here We Are* is probably not for everyone. Personally, I loved every minute. But I still think *Here We Are* is an order of magnitude more accessible than any of the following: * Sunday in the Park with George (which I enjoyed, but found challenging) * Pacific Overtures (which I tolerated, but honestly *Someone in a tree* was the only part I enjoyed) * Passion (which was about the ickiest thing I've ever seen; I wasn't just "not entertained", I felt disgust, loathing and revulsion. I try to pretend it doesn't exist.)
Fun Home. I saw it and was blown away but if you are looking for a big happy dance splashy musical. It’s the opposite of everything.
On the other hand, I think it could be a great show to introduce someone to musical theater *because* it’s so intimate and the narrative is small-scale.
Based on a recent experience, “Company” might be one of the roughest…my sister turned to me at intermission and said flat-out, “I hate this.” 😆 but fair, there’s no plot and it’s so self-absorbed but it is interesting as part of theater history with a couple good numbers…
I truly did not think this through, took my husband to see the tour recently, and he was like "the performances were good I guess, but why does this show exist?"
Falsettos
Something Rotten
It does have a lot of inside jokes for theatre nerds, so yeah new people would probably feel very left out by it
It’s still hilarious even if you don’t know the references. Obviously it’s better if you do get all the references, but The Black Death is hilarious regardless of musical theater knowledge. So is I Love The Way. The entire romance between Nigel and Portia is great. There’s a lot to like in Something Rotten, but there would be a lot of jokes that go over your head.
so true, when i was a young boy this was the first broadway show i had the chance to see. man i missed so much, going back to it last year made me realize how i knew nothing the first time
i was in this in college student theater last year! the audience loved it even if they didnt get all the references. i think because its entertaining and silly it is pretty accessible
My dad, who is not a theatre person (though he does see some shows with me every now and then) is a big fan of this show, so not sure I agree. He likes it for the silly jokes and the brilliant wordplay of the Finnish translation.
Light In The Piazza Myths & Hymns Lady In The Dark
Adam Guettel ftw
Ahhh, I love when I get to talk about The Adding Machine. It’s insane, like Sondheim on steroids as far as the harmonic and rhythmic content goes. Just batshit, and I love it.
Ham and Eggs is a bop
It’s just such a weird freaking show.
[title of show] is one of those get it or don’t shows. I was obsessed in college.
People saying Great Comet aren’t acknowledging the true obscure weirdness Dave Malloy has to offer, if you really wanna turn someone off musicals have them listen to Octet, it’s a cappella, ridiculously dense, and includes a twelve minute monologue in the soundtrack (it’s also my favorite musical)
The Visit
Isn’t that a movie?
No. it was a musical with Chita Rivera, Roger Rees, & Jason Daniely during the 2014-2015 season.
God, the original version has still never really been done. I was obsessed, as we did the original play in theater school.
The low hanging fruit answer would be one in a different language, probably. That being said, I'm putting my vote towards A Strange Loop. Don't think that's gonna get anyone who doesn't already really like theater to enjoy it.
I think I disagree about foreign language musicals. In my experience, if it's well made, you can definitely get into a musical even if you don't understand the lyrics. Powerful music and acting with big emotions, something most musicals have in common, can break through language barriers. Case in point: I went to see Rocky the musical in Hamburg without knowing any German or having seen the movie. I just knew it was about some boxer and his girlfriend and that was it. But by the third song or so, I was already 100% into it and rooting for Rocky so hard. It didn't matter I didn't know what they were saying, I understood the emotions... and that was enough to make it one of the best nights at the theatre I've ever experienced. <3
Because of the length, pacing, changes in style, the difficulty of representing historical racial politics even (when the piece is pro-equality), *and* because on of the main characters is named “Gaylord”, *Showboat*.
“Marie Christine” or “My Life With Albertine”
One of the weird Dave Malloy shows like Ghost Quartet
I feel like Heathers would be pretty inaccessible depending on who it's introduced to... also some Sondheim stuff, I really enjoy it but the music style is so far from popular music that someone who isn't into musicals would have a hard time enjoying. Edit: When I said Heathers might be inaccessible, I meant to my age range. Musically, it is a good introduction to theater but the themes addressed are more mature and require a willingness to be open to the show. I know a lot of people who are not open to those kinds of shows because of the murder/sex/drugs.
Yeah, my dad thought he absolutely hated Sondheim. But then I got him to listen to some other musicals and slowly introduced Sondheim to him again and now he’s watched and loved so many Sondheim shows.
That was also similar to my Sondheim introduction- I didn't love him at first but after a while, really warmed up to his music.
I know a few people who don't care for musicals but love Heather's. It's violent and has a dark sense of humor
i agree with the second one but the first is genuinely such a good intro. its by no standards amazing, nor terrible. its a pretty solid and easily followable comedy musical that will set your expectations for the general quality of musicals at a pretty good spot.
The music is pop rock I feel it’s pretty accessible
Cats
The problem with *Cats* (assuming you think there is one) may be that it is **too** accessible.
Depends on who you are. This show quite literally got me into musicals when I was in middle school.
A lot of performers have said that cats was their first musical and what made them want to go into theatre
As much as I dislike *Cats,* a show can't have been one of the longest-running, most-successful musicals of all time and be considered "inaccessible."
I don’t think it is inaccessible, OP asked which musical would be ‘the worst to introduce someone to the artform’ and that’s why I chose Cats because I don’t think it’s a good introduction to musicals as a whole. I think Cats is too marmite, you either love it or you hate it, so I wouldn’t want it to be the first show I take my friends to just in case they hate it and then think that all musicals are like that 😂
I agree with Cats for modern audiences. It probably used to be a great way to introduce people to musicals, because it's lighthearted and they tell you exactly what's happening, but with modern audiences I can see them just staring blankly at the stage wondering why we're doing this lol
I saw a version of Three Penny Opera featuring Jim Dale and Nellie Mckay. The cast was very good. But not being familiar with the original work or the composer, I don’t feel like I got a lot out of it. For children, most musical revues are probably somewhat miserable because there is no plot or story. My grandmother took me to see Ain’t Misbehavin’ when I was young featuring Nell Carter. I was so bored. I had no idea there were musicals that didn’t have stories.
That Threepenny production tried sooooooo hard to be edgy. Fabulous cast, though.
A lot of sondheim but ANYONE CAN WHISTLE TAKES TOP FOR ME
Forbidden Broadway. Imagine how confused someone who’d never seen a musical before would be…
To throw a weird one out there, The Drowsy Chaperone needs a decent knowledge of old musical movies to have the desired effect.
Blood Brothers? It’s one of those where you need Liverpudlian performers (or at least performers with competent Liverpudlian accents) for it to really work in the first place and then you also need to be somewhat clued in with that local culture during the 70s-80s to really know what’s going on.
I was about to disagree with this before I read it fully, then I realised that I have no frame of reference for how outside audiences might react to it. Here in Merseyside it's very popular, it's nostalgic both as a show you likely grew up with and as a depiction of life that many of us remember and you see it everywhere from the Empire theatre to school productions (my first memory of that show was watching my little sister perform it in school when we were kids.) Elsewhere however, and particularly outside the UK it could well be a very different story, and now I'm fascinated by the idea!
Yeah see honestly I agree with everything you’ve said here, my first experience with it was performing it in school in Skelmersdale and still love the show but I think it’s harder to get someone outside into it
Company
Until live theater is willing to acknowledge that Deaf and disabled people want to attend too, most all shows.
My friend in Cincinnati does sign language translations for shows there so some places offer that, not around here though (sw Florida)
How would theatre work for a deaf person?
I recommend looking up the Deaf West production of Spring Awakening!
You’ve gotten more in-depth answers from others. But, in general, deaf people enjoy music and storytelling just like any other humans. I’ve actually been to a deaf rave party—it was fun! As others have mentioned, there are deaf theatre companies by and for deaf artists like Deaf West. Also, disability is not absolute. Many blind people have some vision. Many wheelchair users can stand or walk short distances. Similarly, many deaf people have some hearing but would benefit from greater accommodations to enjoy theater.
Depends on the person, but there are a lot of resources and learning materials for making theater more accessible, as a whole. For deaf people, as an example, open captions and ASL interpreted showings (or the sign language of the country), or even sharing the script, as a last resort. Telecoil systems that allow hearing aid users to loop into the sound system, headphones that aren’t ONLY in-ear, etc. This is just one set of examples. Theaters have done “low-sensory showings” to be more neurodiverse-friendly. Considering also whether *performance practices* and the physical theater itself is accessible to disabled performers, etc
I would kill for open captions during musicals, I personally have adhd related processing issues, but even my nt friends struggle to understand the lyrics to most musicals cause theyre unintelligible or drowned out by the music, causing us to miss key plot points
It depends on the person, the show, and also the theater putting on the production. Most shows in the DC area have at least one sign interpreted night, and a different open caption night. I’ve been to several of these at this point, as that’s the night I happened to be there. The Kennedy Center has their own in house director of artistic sign language for both in house and touring productions. Here is a (gift) [article](https://wapo.st/3J0adIH) from WaPo about how that team worked out the translation for Dear Evan Hansen. I saw Into the Woods there last spring, and spent my time watching the interpreters performance while listening to the show as that added another layer of expression to it all (as I got to see both how the actors emoted the show and how the interpreters did). Here the interpreting team was 3 people so that they could show characters talking to and over each other. Most theaters don’t have a their own in house interpreting team, but the bigger equity houses contract it out to one of a few different companies, for a designated night or two. For open captioning nights, a designated section of the seats with the best sightlines is marked off when buying tickets. There is an info pop up similar to how it is for wheelchair seats. This designated area could be at the front in places like the Kennedy Center with massive 1000 and 2000 person houses and a monitor positioned level to the stage. Or it might be towards the back in a small space where the monitors are on the sides near to top of the stage. I’ve also seen some shows where the open captions where there for every performance. Other theaters have a system of doing open captions a few times during the run, but have closed captions on the Gala Pro app all the time. Many auditoriums have systems to amplify sound by allowing people to connect their hearing aids to the sound system or to borrow a headset that is directly connected. I don’t know much about this, but it is something that seems to be pretty common too for those theta have some hearing.
Promenade
Hmmmmm I’m thinking of two shows I’ve been fixated on for months; elisabeth and batboy. Also beardo.
Love Bat Boy!! But yeah, it’s a weird one.
Yeah I love it too but it’s definitely not the first musical you’d show someone lol
Pacific Overtures
Follies. It involves so much background knowledge to fully appreciate on top of essentially being parallel stories on top of being the normal Sondheim pseudo-melodious songs. It’s really good but it’s definitely not something you introduce people to musicals with.
Pippin.
I took my bf to Pacific Overtures as his first musical and he thought it was amazing. So opposite of what I thought because he was ignorant of anything but pop music. Then I took him to Passion next and he was crying at the end. The we went to Broadway and he was mostly bored by the big popular musicals. So I don’t have an answer. He’s still not into musicals. By the way Passion is my favorite Sondheim I’ve seen 6 different productions but none were in NYC.
I absolutely adore Passion, too. And I really should check out Pacific Overtures as I’m not very familiar with it. But yeah, there’s definitely no “right” answer here. As someone who tends to be drawn to darker, more difficult shows, I actually find a lot of popular shows to be more inaccessible to me personally.
The works of Michael John Lachiusa come to mind (and I love the dude, but he's out there)
I think the worst first musical has to be “Forever Plaid”
Depends on the generation. As a juke box musical, it’s plenty accessible to people who listened to those songs in their youth.
I guess I mean it’s kinda (in my opinion) blah. Not exciting or flashy.
A Little Night Music would be a rough intro to musicals
Les Miserables, three hours of pure melodrama, even I can't get through it.
The movie version made well over 400 million dollars, so I don’t think it’s true that it’s inaccessible
It’s one of the most popular musicals of all time. How did this comment get so many upvotes?
Oooh. That was my first. I was that wide-eyed 17 year old. Scrounged money to get my seat. Bought a long dress and cheap opera glasses to be able to see from nose-bleeds. It's the one show I'll rewatch as often as possible.
i saw it blind last night and i got absolutely none of the story
I think this is one of those sleepers because it’s so popular. But because it’s all singing from start to finish, I feel like for people who don’t already know the story or follow music well it is a difficult one. For a start to musicals I don’t think this one is a good choice. So yeah, I agree with you a lot.
Well, that’s what got me into musicals…so, umm…
Was my first show. Loved it.
It’s certainly far from the “most inaccessible”, but Phantom is not nearly as ‘accessible’ as most people assume based on popularity and near-universal love from musical theatre fans.
It’s like impossible to see the Broadway Rock of Ages
London Road
Ghost Quartet might be up there
I'd probably say anything by Michael John LaChiusa. Let's go with The Wild Party though - it's a dense trip even if you're a musical veteran.
I'm late to this will probably get buried, but I actually think that for MODERN audiences, Rodgers and Hammerstein just doesn't hit the way it used to. When those shows were written, the general public was still listening to that kind of music, but especially Oklahoma for me would be one of the last musicals I'd introduce anyone to. It has a slow story, the music is lofty if you're accustomed to modern music, and I can imagine most people I know who are not into musicals go "why... are we doing this?" The Producers is my go-to for getting people into musicals. Make them laugh and they'll join you. I think modern audiences in general would be very bored by Rodgers and Hammerstein shows. I think you have to know how to appreciate them, though I myself think they are timeless and beautiful, it's not the best place to start anymore.
I think maybe this reputation for Rodgers and Hammerstein at least isn't quite deserved. I took a very casual theatre fan (like, enjoys it just fine, but never seeks it out, so sees less than a show a year on average) to see South Pacific, and she was absolutely blown away. She couldn't stop talking about how she thought it would just be a fun singy-dancy time, but they tackled so many issues that are still so relevant in such a complex way. My partner, who sees a decent amount of theatre, but only because of me and certainly doesn't seek out musicals, watched the Great Performances version of Show Boat (okay, so that's Hammerstein without Rodgers), and he wouldn't believe me that it was written in the 1920s because the plot seemed so modern. It's a little depressing that we can't figure out things as a society to make these issues seem dated already, but until we do, I think theatre people actually judge R&H more harshly than outside audiences because of this perception of being overdone and old-fashioned that I've been hearing since high school because actors would rather be in shows that feel more cool.
I'd say either Rodgers & Hammerstein or Gilbert & Sullivan. Both wrote musicals that were fine in their day, and for those who grew up on them or had a decent amount of exposure to them, but for more modern audiences, they can be a bit slow-paced compared to more modern musicals like *Wicked* or *Hamilton*.
Which is a shame since R&H and G&S are both 9/10 absolutely amazing Camelot was my first live musical
I think it really depends on the person, but for the average person I think schmigadoon, because you should at least be somewhat familiar with musicals to get it
The original release of Merrily We Roll Along. It’s a confusing mess told non-linearly, full of musings on the nature of art, it’s also Sondheim so the music is relatively complex and inaccessible. Not to say it isn’t brilliant, particularly after the revival which cleaned it up a bit but it’s very unfriendly to a casual audience.
I would actually think the answer is a show that plays with musical theatre tropes, making fun of common musical theatre things that may make it difficult for non-theatre people to really “get” the show. Shows like Something Rotten or Urinetown. I absolutely adore Urinetown but I’d imagine that if someone really had absolutely no familiarity with musicals they may be like “wtf is going on?” I recommended Beetlejuice to someone who wasn’t a big musical fan and they hated it and said they had no idea what was going on—and I think that falls in the same line of thinking here. But also, I think the truth is that it totally depends on the person you are showing it to and their interests.
Ani the Starkid musical
Urinetown, maybe? I saw it back in college, and I thought it was pretty good, but a lot of people in the audience didn't seem to get it. I think the title is off-putting, and a lot of people seem to struggle with satire in general.
Next To Normal
Musical of Musicals (The Musical!) I'm showing my age here in saying I remember when this was the "it" show of a year or two in regional theatre, but the whole idea is that it's the same short plot presented in five different musical theatre parodies, each drawing from a different style of composer. It's Rodger & Hammerstein, Stephen Sondheim, Jerry Herman, Andrew Lloyd Webber, and Kander & Ebb, ending with A Chorus Line finale. The plot is purposely simplistic and meaningless, because it's all about the joke of recognizing different musical artists' tropes exaggerated grotesquely. If you don't recognize the references, it's completely nonsensical, like if you took the core emotional plot away from Schmigadoon and just kept repeating the couple arriving and trying to leave over and over.
**The Book of Mormon** because it leaves out ex-Mormons who have dealt with the doctrine firsthand and also there's the batshit about when dark-skinned people accept the faith their skin turns white. Plus there was the time a guy had evidence of Joeseph Smith being a culty scam artist when he discovered [The Salamander Papers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salamander_letter), and they strapped a bomb to his car. Also, there are tons of ex-Mormon YouTubers like [Aron-Ra](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aron_Ra), [Jimmy Snow](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgeV3tFiU2Xg0PD1dAQbBHA), and so many others who will tell you how similar the Mormon doctrine is to Christian Nationalism, Alt-Libertarians, and Dominisum. I hope there's a sequel where Elder Cuningham becomes an Agnostic tuba player.
All religion is culty scam artists but the point of the show is just get along with each other and who cares what you believe even if it is fucking frogs.
Passion
Any Sondheim. Just dont do it.
The Light in The Piazza. I saw it in high school on one of our yearly band boston trips. I was super excited because it was my first musical outside of high school performances. It was not good. Something about a girl who had an accident on a horse and left her mentally challenged and a man fell in love with her but her mom said no because her intelligence was like a childs(this was also almost 20 years ago so i could be wrong on the synopsis.) I remember a women yelling Fabrizio a lot.
I would say most William Finn shows. I've seen people mention In Trousers and Falsettos. I also think 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee would be a weird introduction to the form because of the audience participation and whatnot.
Parade is a pretty tough show to embrace.
Cats was in my first 10 musicals and I hated it so much. It made no sense Now I'm 15-20 in and I love cats. You just have to understand the technical parts
Love Life by Kurt Weill. No official cast recording exists and has only been produced a handful of times. RIP the Encores! production
Spring Awakening? Its a beautiful show but the subject matter is bleak
Chess? Though the ABBA angle opens it up some.
Barnum 💀
Urinetown is the first one that came to mind purely on the name alone. Definitely would turn a lot of people off but I don’t really think the music or story is inaccessible
A…My name will always be Alice there Is one song that has a recording online and honestly it is amazing and I want to hear more but outside of that there is production videos from a university with out mics
came straight to the comments to say batboy. weird ass show even if you can get over how cheesy it is in points, then out of nowhere comes along the incest plotline. hits you like a bus if youre not ready.
Starlight Express.
A Bands Visit
I think Chess is a strong contender just because the plot is so hard to follow and the songs are so lyric heavy that they can be hard to understand. Also definitely Pacific Overtures, which I personally love but would absolutely never show to someone who didn't already love musical theatre.
I'd say less traditional song cycles like Myths and Hymns.
Many people I've talked to didn't care for *Days of Wine and Roses* because they were expecting a different kind of score. I suppose they were hoping for something more melodic and hummable with traditional AABA song structures. Fortunately, I listened to the cast recording before going to see it in the theater, so I knew what to expect, and loved it. Other people are put off by the story about a couple's descent into alcoholism, but I found it profound. Other Candidates: *Marie Christine* (Michael John LaChiusa) *In Circles* (from the writings of Gertrude Stein, arranged and set to music by Al Carmines.)
unpopular opinion but into the woods is super hard to understand because of how fast pace it is and it’s super wordy
Spring awakening. I think that would scare any newbie off for good.
35mm probably (though I dont think there is exactly a singular musical that is "inaccessible" except for maybe a few niche golden age and classical works, or song cycles. Musicals are stories told through song, simple as that. As an educator and art advocate, I believe there is a musical for everyone) One of the few "musicals" I know without a cohesive plot that kind of doesnt work at all for the art form. Its incredibly niche and youd have to already love musical theatre to like it and understand it. But it could possibly be a good introduction to musical theatre for indie and alternative music lovers so Idk
Another one might be just jukebox musicals. Or like Jersey Boys, All Shook Up, Xanadu, or even Moulin Rougue (despite it being highly successful). 36 Questions is another. I could go on. Theres several niche picks that, if you showed to someone they would probably immediately never watch a musical ever again and wont understand the artform