Now I truly believe that most people who saw the film version of The Wedding Singer, the 1980s-era romantic comedy, truly liked it. It is a great movie with lots of comedy and charm. However - appropriate for a transfer to the Broadway stage? I’m not so sure.

In my experience, the quality of your seat will drastically affect your enjoyment of a show - therefore sitting in the second to last row (the TDF cheap seats) might have made all the show’s flaws even more apparent.

First, the cast is solid, if not excellent at times. Steven Lynch as Robbie (the Sandler role) in his Broadway debut, is more known for his work in comedy. And it’s apparent. He is so well suited for this role - he sings, he dances, he acts, he plays guitar, and his physical comedy is incredible (although not appreciated by our elderly seat companions in the back rows). He is unevenly matched by Laura Benati as Julia. Yes, the role is poorly written. She’s dumb, boring, unintelligent, and ambitionless, and doesn’t really give Robbie a lot to actually fall in love with. So in that regard, I blame the writers, not Benati. However, Amy Spanger’s role (Holly) is also poorly written and she hits it out of the park. This girl steals the show in every scene and thankfully, the character has a ton more to do than I’d expected. The close of act 1 is a nightclub dance scene which culminates in her pulling a rope, and getting doused in a sexy free-fall of water. So cheezy and tacky and ridiculous, you sort of have to love it.

Another nod goes to Rita Gardner, who was the original Louisa in The Fantastics in 1960. In her seventies now, I would assume, she’s quite an inspiration. Funny stuff when she does the rap number towards the end. And Kevin Cahoon, as George, is horrifically underused. He has like 4 lines, and they’re all about how the character is gay. And that fact sort of opened up the big picture for me. They use George’s gay-ness not as a way to celebrate diversity, but to point out the fact that he is different from the other characters. Yes, in the 1980s, being gay wasn’t as openly discussed as it is now, and therefore in the world of this play, the topic would be treated accordingly. Still, it feels more like this is a musical that panders to a very conservative, right wing, elderly audience, purely in order to make money. There’s the gay-as-other thing. Then, the issue of Julia. Why does Robbie love her? Because she’s pretty. What is her main ambition in life? To get married. There’s a horribly mysogynist song where all the ladies go into the bathroom and sing about how excited they are that he might POP the question!!! Does not paint a pretty picture of womankind. Then there’s Glen Gulia (played by Richard Blake). The stereotypical stockbroker who does coke and cheats on his fiance. Paper-thin character development. Why is Julia with him for so long? Because he has money, and that’s what women really want - a fact coroborated by Holly. So, the average audience member might see this as a period piece. But the more perceptive would see it as a dangerously slanted piece of nostalga, celebrating a dumber, more superficial, sexist time in our history.

The music, by Matthew Sklar, is fine, and there are some genuinely good numbers. The dance numbers are all really entertaining - and I usually don’t notice choreography, but Rob Ashford’s work on this show is excellent. Appropriate for the time period and just a ton of fun to watch. Also, always entertaining are any of the songs in which Robbie sings. He’s funny in every scene. However, there are WAY to many ballads which drags the show out for 2:45 - far too long. Some of the love ballads in act one really, really need to go.

The best thing about the show, hands down, is the set. It’s incredible. Most every scene takes place in a different location, and therefore every scene has it’s own set. The set transitions, in addition, are seamless. Scott Pask (who’s work I loved on The Pillowman) has far more talent than any of the writers.

Die-hard fans of the movie I think will be disappointed by the show. But as a fun, mindless night out, it really does have some good moments. It just also has a lot of bad ones that need fixing.

Title of Show unfortunately recently closed. For those of my numberous readers (I think I have three) who didn’t see the show, I’m sure there will be many opportunities in the future, as I envision this show will enjoy a life beyond it’s original production. But to cast other people in the four original roles will be downright strange, and here is why. The show chronicles the experience of two actor/playwrights throwing a musical together in three weeks and then submitting it to the New York Musical Theatre Festival (NYMTF). So the action of the play is essentially their process in writing the show that you see before you. Trippy. And of course, the two creators, Jeff Bowen and Hunter Bell, play themselves in the play about themselves writing the show that you see before you. It makes your head hurt a little. But it’s also hilarious.

The show is very much a love letter to the musical theatre industry, with more “in” jokes than even the most self-referential of shows (i.e. Forbidden Broadway). But it’s done with such comedic skill and charm that even the most non-musical-theaterey viewer will find things to enjoy and laugh at. And they even discuss the fact that they can’t be afraid to alienate some people with obscure references, because if not, what else is left to talk about? Can’t worry about everyone, essentially.

The music, by Bowen, is good, some songs being much better than others. It’s genious is how well it serves the lyrics - each song is chock full of jokes and excellent rhyme schemes. The creation of the score seems to have been a very collaborative effort, and stylistically Sondheimian, meaning that the music and lyrics play and equally important role in the progression of the story.

Now you’d think that there wouldn’t be much to talk about in a show with such a simple plot. Somehow they manage to tackle every aspect of their creative process (easily harvested material because all they had to do was write down what was happening!). My personal favorite number, “Die Vampire Die!” explores the different kinds of things that hold us back (our personal vampires) and hinder our creative minds and processes… the most dangerous vampire of all being that of self-doubt, which hits close to home for all creative people. Then there’s the Schoolhouse Rock parody “An Original Musical,” a clear homage to “I’m just a Bill.” The final number, “Nine Peoples’ Favorite Thing, ” is inspirational and by far the catchiest of tunes.

Bowen is the stand out comedian of the pair, and Bell plays the straight (gay) man exceptionally well. Then there’s the girls; the supporting cast of their two friends who agree to do the show, and subsequently play themselves in the show. Susan Blackwell is deadpan, quirky humor personafied. Heidi Blickenstaff is a high-belting dynamo. Their work in the show, although essentially secondary characters, stands out as strongly as that of the boys. What’s interesting as a plot twist toward the end is the section where Emily Skinner has agreed to do the show and play Heidi’s part - and how they deal with that casting decision. In fact there are several big-name Broadway actors who do voice cameos for the show (Kerry Butler, Victoria Clark, and of course Skinner, among others) for added comedic effect.

Essentially this is just a comedy that works incredibly well, particularly if you get all the jokes. For example, in a final, climactic moment, Bell says something is tainted, and Bowen just snickers for a second and then responds, “Taint.” Now that’s the kind of low-brow comedy I can really get into. A gem.