Home > Theater Reviews > Archives > 2006 > March > 23 > Entry
‘Jelly’s Last Jam’ @ the Alliance
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
THEATER REVIEW. “Jelly’s Last Jam.” Alliance Theatre. Through April 9.
In “Jelly’s Last Jam,� flashy Jelly Roll Morton is introduced to his next conquest as a “lover of women, inventor of jazz and owner of 27 suits.� Sex, music and beautiful clothes: What else do you need for a Broadway spectacle but a couple of tap-dancing prodigies with spats and smiles?
For starters, you need a sinister leading man who can make a show-stopping entrance — by stepping out of a body bag. An unashamed bigot who claims there’s “no coon stock in this Creoleâ€? and spends the second half of his life on a self-destructing path of hurt and anger turned outward.
As book writer George C. Wolfe insisted in his 1992 Broadway musical, which has been resuscitated in a stunning Alliance Theatre revival, the Morton story isn’t about jazz and dance, and it’s certainly not about last-minute redemption and hallelujah choruses. It’s about race.
As the soul-reaping character known as The Chimney Man (Billy Porter) tells us in the Prologue, Morton (J.D. Goldblatt) resides in the same pantheon as Armstrong and Ellington. But instead of becoming a beloved ambassador of swing, he “denies the black soil from which this rhythm was born,� a fatal mistake that provides the central contradiction of this emotionally devastating, magnificently conceived musical biography.
Perhaps the Hunnies (the three-member female chorus) don’t shimmy quite as much as they should in the splashy opening number, “In My Day.� Maybe the diction’s a little slurry early on and the depiction of the New Orleans underworld a bit tawdry for my taste.
But really now. I can’t say enough good things about director-choreographer Kent Gash’s glorious new production, which has been reorchestrated for a smaller band by musical director Darryl G. Ivey and styled to the nines by set designer Emily Jean Beck and costume artist Austin K. Sanderson. (Byron Easley shares the choreography credits.)
Easily the best Alliance musical since Gash’s “Pacific Overtures,� in 2003, the first major revival of “Jelly’s� is the sort of event that will cause box-office switchboards to crash and put national producers on planes to Atlanta.
For a theater town in need of a spring hit, the Alliance has delivered the season’s most essential musical.
Jelly and his diamond-studded tooth may be the center of this theatrical universe. But it takes an incandescent ensemble to illuminate the dark outer galaxies of his troubled soul, and the Alliance stage is rarely without a strand of shining supporting stars.
So while the excellent, charismatic Goldblatt captures both the gleam and the spleen of the self-infatuated Morton, he’s well matched by Rodrick Covington as Jelly’s fawning, double-crossed friend Jack the Bear; the lovely Karole Foreman as love interest Anita; and LaVon Fisher as the ferocious, mantilla-crowned grandmother, who kicks Morton out of the house for fraternizing with New Orleans lowlife.
His grandmother’s dismissal, and the fact that W.C. Handy usurped his father-of-jazz credentials, are Morton’s twin demons.
Porter’s Chimney Man does the trick, even if he’s a little more flamboyant than necessary. Andre Ward’s big-eyed Buddy Bolden is delightfully intimidating to the Young Jelly, and Eric B. Anthony, bless his heart, has the unthankful task of recreating the part originated by the young Savion Glover (Young Jelly). Except for seeming somewhat stifled by his spatterdashes, Anthony does just fine.
Among the best numbers are “The Creole Way,� about the Morton family’s infatuation with powder, wigs and all things French; Anita’s “Play the Music for Me� (check out her filigreed gown) and the down-and-dirty “Lovin’ Is a Lowdown Blues,� which uses a canopied bed and curtains to conceal what’s happening beneath the sheets, but only partly. (This is probably a good time to advise parents that the show contains adult language and situations.)
Dance wise, Gash and Easley give us more stomping than outright hoofing (a smart choice, given the iconic performances of Glover and the late Gregory Hines as Broadway’s Jelly).
But the show’s most arresting quality may be its eye candy. William H. Grant III’s lighting can be forensically harsh one moment, moon-splashed the next — the perfect accompaniment to Beck’s wrought-iron balustrades, keyboard-framed proscenium and gorgeous carved moldings. If the devil’s in the details, the Alliance’s superb team of stitchers, carpenters, artisans and props meisters outdo themselves down to the last feather and finial.
When it comes to spectacle, the Alliance has no peer in Atlanta. Shows like this are why it’s on par with the nation’s best regional playhouses.
The final word on this wildly ambitious, technically complicated, impeccably scored, emotionally challenging musical: It’s a knockout.
THE 411: 8 p.m. Tuesdays-Saturdays; 2:30 p.m. Saturdays-Sundays. 7:30 p.m. Sundays. Through April 9. $20-$50. Alliance Theatre, 1280 Peachtree St. N.E., Atlanta. 404-875-5663; alliancetheatre.org.
THE VERDICT: Spectacular.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Zach Sartori
March 23, 2006 10:48 PM | Link to this
That sounds like a great show. Shame it’s not the one I saw at the Alliance. Goldblatt is great at channeling Hines’ Jelly and a decent dancer as well, but he’s simply not believable as a musician. He spends a lot of time playing air piano by just wiggling his fingers, which honestly doesn’t look like much of anything. A scene where he wants to be conducting the orchestra is a laughable try at best. Porter’s Chimney Man can certainly sing, but he exudes no menace whatsoever. Jelly and Chimney Man here are friendly rivals instead of having any real friction to speak of—name calling aside—and while I’m not expecting somebody to match Keith David’s take on the character, “flamboyant” is being kind. If there’s a laugh line, expect to be delivered loudly, with the only thing missing the “LAUGHTER” sign for the studio audience. If anyone deserves a nod, it’s Covington, whose Jack the Bear is not only the most consistently good interp, but also eminently likable, making the end of the first act even more devastating…which is destroyed by one of the worst design choices in recent memory: dancers wearing giant blackface muppet heads. I am not kidding. Whoever took Gash to see AVENUE Q is certainly regretting it now, as Muppet-esque characters make three appearances on stage and achieve nothing more than ejecting the audience from the reality that the show has spent time building up. The costumes are great, yes, but distracting and needlessly complex. For example, I’m too busy wondering why the Hunnies are wearing pool balls to pay attention to “The Pool Game.” And the choreography is great when it’s one or two people on stage, but get the whole chorus (who were all freaking excellent, I must say—so this isn’t their fault) in something like the street sequence of “The Whole World…” and it’s just a smoking crater of a jumbled chaotic mess where a fine song used to exist. One addition I’d like to state is that while Andre Ward is delightfully off his rocker as Bolden, the lady who takes the lead on “Michigan Water” (I regret I don’t recall her name) butchers the lyrics so it’s hard to understand what they are. Luckily the scene and the wailing are good enough to distract someone away from this. Foreman can certainly wail as Anita, and has her moments, but the final bit between her and Jelly just seemed stale. Fisher does indeed, thankfully, bring the noise as the grandma—if kicking Jelly out of the house doesn’t give you gooseflesh, then something’s wrong with you. I think it’s great somebody’s finally decided to stage JELLY’s again, seeing as how it (and other shows equally worthy) was robbed of the Tony when it went to CRAZY FOR YOU (!) that year instead, but I just wish they had reigned in Gash’s “vision,” which basically consists of taking excellent, dramatic scenes with their messages about race and then negating them as he drives them home with a sledgehammer, since apparently the audience can’t be trusted to “get” the message as the authors of the show intended. Overall: decent leads (with some reservations as notated above), an excellent chorus with some incredible vocal power, and a visual mess. You could do a lot worse for a night at the theatre, that’s for sure.
By melissa
March 24, 2006 2:24 AM | Link to this
The actors and crew worked hard on this show so take your negativity and shove it!
By my 2 cents
March 24, 2006 9:01 AM | Link to this
I have to say that I’m in agreement with Zach pretty much across the board. I’m not sure why you’re so vehement, melissa. Yes, I’m sure everyone worked very hard. Does that mean that all we owe their efforts is a patronizing “good effort” and a pat on the head? I like to think more highly of theatre professionals than that. Zach wrote a pretty even-handed representation of his opinion. And it’s hardly all negative. No production is perfect. But everyone involved is a professional, and they should value the honest opinions of their audience…presuming of course that they are in the business to tell stories and have an effect on people rather than merely having their egos stroked.
I don’t want to simply repeat what he has said, beyond seconding my disappoinment at the lack of menace from the Chimney Man… and the EXCELLENCE of Covington as Jack the Bear…and Jelly’s banishment scene was truly fantastic. But I do want to add that they really should have either gotten a choreographer with a better grounding in rhythm tap…or foregone the tap completely in staging this production. Using so many time steps in a show that is (in part) about the richness and soul of jazz music is criminal.
The show I saw had a very talented cast that was hampered by the choreography and left adrift in the scenework. Critical emotional moments just slipped on by without conveying much impact. It’s the first musical produced at the Alliance that I have seen, so I have no idea if it is a typical example of Kent Gash’s work.
I think the show is worth attending for the music alone. The vocal talent on stage (minus some opening night lyric issues…which, given the overall talent level displayed, I am willing to write off as a one-night flub…part of the magic of live theatre) is superb. And I truly enjoyed the orchestrations of Jelly’s music in a musical theatre context.
A flawed production? Sure. But they all are in some way. We’re only human, far from perfect. But ignoring the places where we fall down does nothing to help us improve. Is it a show worth seeing? Definitely. Warts and all.
By Ari
March 27, 2006 8:33 PM | Link to this
While one doesn’t need to patronize actors and pat them on the head just cause they worked hard, the fact is: this is one of the most outstanding and talented casts I’ve ever seen in any regional production of ANYTHING. You would be hard pressed to find a Broadway cast that can sing, dance and act with as much flair, chops and personality as the cast of Jelly’s Last Jam at the Alliance. The production happens to be impecably directed and the tap dancing is completely relevant in the telling of this particular story of Jazz as it was when it was last on Broadway. And I stronlgt disagree with the reviewer about the Chimney Man being “too flamboyant.” This is yet another example of someone being disturbed by a performance that messes with our preconceived notions of gender—which in this case is done brilliantly by Billy Porter. The Chimney Man is supposed to be beyond gender as he is an angel or a God like figure. Plus, the point of the Chimnney Man is not necessarily to be “menacing.” He knows that he is now in control of Jelly—who is already dead. He doesn’t have to be menacing, but rather he has to lead Jelly on a journey to see the Truth and to seek the Truth about his life. One does not need to lead with menace, but rather with strength, dignitiy and why not, a little flair which Porter does with grace, style, charisma and undeniable talents.
By my 2 cents
March 28, 2006 9:58 AM | Link to this
Oh, Ari. You were so close. We were almost having a civil discussion about a play when you had to throw in a backhanded suggestion that Zach is a homophobe. He may be, I don’t know. But I didn’t see any suggestion of that in his comments.
I also felt that the Chimney Man was too flamboyant (and you can rest assured that I have no problem with homosexuality on stage or in presentations of authority figures)…but it has nothing to do with sexual orientation. There are plenty of ways to be flamboyant that have nothing to do with appearing “gay”. In fact, the idea that Porter might have been messing with our “preconceived notions of gender” never occured to me until you said it. But that’s what makes live theatre so great! We saw the same show…but we also saw completely different shows.
The magic part here is that I am right. And you are right. And Wendell is right. And Zach is right. Melissa brought nothing to the discussion, so she’s wrong. But everyone who saw it and has SOMETHING to say about it is right.
If the idea of the Chimney Man arguing with Jelly as an equal moves you…great! I would have preferred to see a figure that was forcing Jelly to confront his life more as a judge than (as I saw it) a friend. Both are perfectly valid viewpoints. You were moved by the relationship, I was not. We come to the show with different backgrounds and different persectives. And we can disagree without either one of us being “wrong”. It’s part of the fun.
The cast is undeniably talented. I think we all agree there. We disagree on the directing. And the tap dancing is certainly relevant to the telling of the story. I would go so far as to say it’s critical when you consider who the show was originally written to showcase…And that’s precisely why I think they should have gotten a tap choreographer with a better understanding of the rhythm tap style. One of the things that made the tap in the original production so effective is the way rhythm tap sits in the groove of jazz music. It was as groundbreaking as having “pop” style singing in a Broadway musical when Rent came along. I consider it one of the great legacies of the original production of Jelly’s. I found standard Broadway style tap and arms to be distracting since rhythm tap is one of the reasons I went to see the show in the first place. If someone else were considering seeing the show for that reason, I think they would like to have my perspective on the choreography.
Why am I getting so involved in this discussion? It’s not out of a particular need to defend my viewpoint. I don’t think that it is necessarily more valid than anyone else’s. I haven’t been in this city for very long. But in the short time I’ve been here, I have been struck by people’s attitudes about discussing theatre. It seems like you either love a production or you want all of the people involved with a show to die. So the intimation that a production is less than perfect immediately puts you in the second category. I miss the middle ground, where you can like some things and not like other things…be moved by one moment and not affected by another…and then talk about it and have it be okay.
I think I’m still here because I hope we can start doing that.
I thought Jelly’s banishment was chilling. Loved it. I was completely taken in by Jack the Bear and it hurt me when Jelly gave him the red coat. It hurt a lot. I was told several times that Jelly was fighting for his soul, but I didn’t really feel it…and I lay that mainly at the feet of the interaction between Jelly and the Chimney Man. I felt like Jelly had too much power to effect the Chimney Man. One example that comes to mind off the top of my head is the scene near the end when the CM asks “Why?” several times in a row. I felt like he was searching for an answer for himself instead of forcing Jelly to confront the truth that the CM already knows. And I found that less than compelling.
What’s so upsetting about that?
By Karen M.
April 2, 2006 11:17 PM | Link to this
We just saw Sunday night’s performance of Jelly’s Last Jam. It was fantastic! Nitpicking aside, it was the most emotionally stirring musical I think I’ve ever seen. The dancing and acting were amazing to watch. For a musical, Jelly’s character was nuanced and complex and, in the end, very sad. I absolutely loved it!
By Sharon Gamble
April 7, 2006 3:42 PM | Link to this
FOR RELEASE April 7, 2006
Contact: Sharon Gamble, NNPN PR Committee c/o The Phoenix Theatre, Indianapolis Phone: 317.635.2381 E-mail: sgamble@phoenixtheatre.org web: www.nnpn.org
The National New Play Network (NNPN) is pleased to announce that it will administer a new play prize. Funded by a gift from novelist and playwright Timothy Smith, The Timothy Smith Prize will be awarded to a play that illuminates issues that can only be dealt with at the national or global level, even if the story is told from an individual perspective. The NNPN is seeking plays that examine our civic institutions, particularly our democratic institutions, and ask: Who are Americans as a people? What are we becoming? What are our global responsibilities?
The Prize carries a $2,500 cash award. The deadline for submissions for consideration for the first annual award is July 15, 2006. Scripts should be submitted to Toni Press-Coffman, preferably via e-mail — tpplay@cox.net — with “Timothy Smith Prizeâ€? in the subject line. Scripts may also be submitted by conventional mail to Toni Press-Coffman, Timothy Smith Prize, c/o Borderlands Theatre, PO Box 2791, Tucson AZ 85702. Scripts will not be returned; however, acknowledgment of receipt will be sent with the inclusion of a self-addressed stamped postcard.
The winner will be announced in December 2006.
The National New Play Network is an alliance of 20 contemporary professional not-for-profit producing theatres that champions the development, production, and continued life of new plays for the American theatre. For more information about the National New Play Network, visit www.nnpn.org.