Camelot
Book and Lyrics by Alan Jay Lerner, Music by Frederick Loewe
Book Adapted by David Lee
Directed by Matt Kunkel
Choreographed by Beth Crandall
The Muny
June 23, 2022
Robert Petkoff (center) and Cast of Camelot
Photo by Phillip Hamer
The Muny
Camelot is a strange show, in the sense that it never seems to be the same show depending on what production you see. Since it first played on Broadway in 1960, there have been many professional, amateur, and school productions, along with a Broadway revival in 1980 and various national tours. I’ve seen many versions, from a high school production to dinner theatre, to a couple of those tours, to the last Muny production in 2009, and there always appear to be changes to the way the story plays out, in terms of the song catalogue and the book. It’s a legendary story that has become a beloved classic, but you never really know what you’re going to see when you see Camelot. Now, the Muny is going even further in the book revisions than I’ve ever seen before with their newest production, featuring an adapted book by David Lee that streamlines many aspects of the story while focusing on the three main characters. It’s a bold endeavor, and for the most part, it works.
The book has always been considered a weakness of Camelot, despite its beloved score and beloved reputation. Revising the book has been done before, and it’s going to be done again (for Broadway later this year, in the hands of well-known playwright and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin). The current Muny production is an adaptation by writer David Lee that overhauls the script in a somewhat drastic way, omitting several characters and some songs, and creating a framing device in which a group of “revelers” tell the story of King Arthur (Robert Petkoff), Queen Guenevere (Shereen Pimentel), and Sir Lancelot (Brandon S. Chu), along with the Knights of the Round Table and the legendary court of Camelot. It starts off somewhat abruptly once Arthur is introduced, and he starts right into his first song, “I Wonder What the King is Doing Tonight”, but soon he meets Guenevere and their chemistry is strong, lighting up the stage as they form a strong, credible bond. Eventually, though, their relationship is challenged by the arrival of Lancelot from France, and the new knight causes a stir in the King’s court and in his marriage, as Lancelot and Guenevere find it difficult to fight their attraction to one another, despite their love for Arthur. Soon, the devious Mordred (Barrett Riggins) shows up to further stir up tensions, among the increasingly bored and dissatisfied knights as well as the royal couple and Lancelot, threatening the very ideals that Arthur has built his kingdom upon.
It’s a well-known story, but this version has distilled the story down to its basic elements, for the most part. There’s a small ensemble, but notable characters from the musical are missing–most notably Merlyn, who is relegated to off-stage status, and King Pellinore, who I found myself missing, since I think his role as a confidant for Arthur is needed in some places. I didn’t miss Merlyn, though, and Arthur’s stories about him work well even without the character’s appearing onstage. Still, what’s done here works to speed up the show a bit, and the framing device helps to emphasize the legendary nature of the story. The look and presentation of the show is also radically different, with a stylized set by Anne Beyersdorfer that is frequently in motion, striking costumes by Tristan Raines that blend elements of Medieval style with more modern rock-inspired looks that feature a lot of leather jackets and chains for the knights, along with more modern suits and dresses for Arthur and Guenevere. The set, along with Shelby Loera’s stunning lighting design and some excellent video design by Kylee Loera, works well with the staging, which takes advantage of the Muny’s turntables to keep the action, and the story, moving along.
The casting is strong, as well, led by a charming performance from Petkoff as the idealistic but self-doubting Arthur. He’s a joy to watch, and his chemistry with Pimentel’s Guenevere is palpable. Pimentel is also excellent, with strong stage presence and a glorious voice, bringing energy to “The Simple Joys of Maidenhood”, “The Lusty Month of May”, and more. Chu is good as Lancelot, with a strong voice, although he doesn’t quite have the bold presence that the character demands from his first appearance, and his scenes with Pimentel aren’t as electric as they should be, although this improves as the show goes on. Other standouts include Riggins as the gleefully malevolent Mordred, oozing stage presence from his first moment on stage. There are also memorable turns from the trio playing Camelot’s top three knights–Daryl Tofa as Sir Lionel, Sarah Quinn Taylor as Ser Sagramore, and Evan Ruggiero as Sir Dinadan. There’s also a strong ensemble and some excellent, energetic choreography by Beth Crandall and some well-paced staging of musical numbers, most notably the cleverly staged “C’est Moi”, which shows Lancelot’s journey to Camelot while he sings.
This is a Camelot like you’ve never seen it before, and it’s certainly a crowd-pleaser. While I did find myself missing some of the elements that were cut out, I find this staging excellently paced and well-cast, with strong singing and a dazzling set and production values. The finale works especially well, with the emphasis on the legendary nature of this story, and for the most part, the cast brings a “shining moment” to the Muny with excellent style.
Shereen Pimentel, Robert Petkoff, Brandon S. Chu and the Cast of Camelot
Photo by Phillip Hamer
The Muny
The Muny is presenting Camelot in Forest Park until June 28th, 2022
I’m sorry. I so disagree. There was no chemistry between the leads and no feelings of emotion in the songs sung. The lack of costuming was off-putting. Songs that should have been more thoughtful (How to Handle a Woman) was song much too quickly. If the Muny keeps ‘reimaging’ the classics, I will stop going. I don’t go to see ‘reimagined’ versions; I go because I love the old, original versions.
I do agree that this production of Camelot was not at all what I expected to see. No thank you if future productions do not present an accurate portrayal of the original.
I used to go to the Muny almost every week but since they’ve started re-imagining these beautiful classics I go maybe once a year. The last debacle I saw there was ‘Paint Your Wagon’ which held no resemblance at all to the show people were requesting. It was awful. The Muny presents a good mix of new shows and old shows. If they want to attract the younger audience, they have enough new shows to do that but please leave the classics to those of us who love them just as they were. Also, I wish they would realize that just because someone is of a younger generation it does not mean they would not appreciate the classic version.
I’m going to add my two cents here, for what it’s worth. Thanks for engaging with my blog and sharing your opinions. I have to disagree with the general tone, though, of “don’t touch the classics”. The Muny is a creative organization. All theatre companies are. While (for the most part) the Muny does not originate these revised scripts, they choose to perform them because they see something worthwhile in reexamining old shows through a current lens. These “revisals” are not unique to the Muny, either–Broadway has done quite a few, and the Cinderella production that Muny produced a few years ago, for instance, originated as a Broadway revival. Some “revisals” essentially replace the “classic” versions in popularity and become the standard versions produced, like “You’re a Good Man, Charlie Brown”, for instance. I’m not sure if anyone does the original version of that show anymore. This version of Camelot is offered for licensing as the “Small Cast Version”, and is offered as an alternative to the “regular” version. Another Camelot “revisal” (by Aaron Sorkin) is due to open on Broadway later this year. If you don’t like revisals, it’s your choice not to see them, but they have been going on for a while, and some of them have been excellent.
Theatre is art. Performing arts aren’t static. You can agree or disagree with the direction a production chooses to take, but theatre isn’t a museum. It’s living and growing, and changes to approach (whether major or minor) are part of that life and growth. As someone who has been going to Muny shows for 18 years (since my family and I moved to St. Louis), I have to say that what the current production team led by Mike Isaacson has done has revitalized and elevated it. For the most part, they don’t drastically “reimagine” everything, but the production values have dramatically improved, and while there have been some productions I haven’t enjoyed as much as others, overall I enjoy what the Muny is doing. This Camelot may not be your cup of tea, and as I wrote in my review, I don’t think all the changes worked. Still, it’s an excellent effort and I hope the Muny continues to pursue excellence as they have been doing, to my estimation.
I’m sorry, Michelle, but I couldn’t disagree with you more. Classics should be left as they were; that’s why they are classic. Would you make changes to the Mona Lisa or re-imagine David? When patrons vote for what they want to see (which they do every year), they are not voting for re-imagined versions of shows these people love. ‘Paint Your Wagon’ was consistently voted for and people were waiting for it to return; I was excited to see it on the schedule…until I saw the production. It held no resemblance at all with the original show; it should have had a different name entirely. The humor was definitely missing.
This version of ‘Camelot’ had no heart. The leads may have had good voices but there was no chemistry between them. ‘Camelot’ should be a very emotional show; You should feel for all three of the leads. I felt nothing during this production. Songs that should have been thoughtful and plaintive (How to Handle a Woman) felt rushed and too ‘peppy’. The costuming was a distraction and made no sense – what was it’s purpose? I do tip my hat to the clever use of the screens to show the horses jousting. But change for change’s sake is not what a good portion of the audience is looking for. There were four of us from many different backgrounds; none of us were impressed nor particularly liked it. We rolled our eyes a couple of times. I did not get any feeling of an excited audience afterwards either. They did clap; some stood up to applaud – many did not and it wasn’t because they weren’t able. I’ve been to the Muny – many years ago, I must admit – where there were standing ovations and no one wanted to stop applauding. Not this time. I read a comment on another site that mentioned they witnessed many people leaving during the show so obviously I wasn’t alone in my assessment.
If the Muny wishes to continue to present re-imagined versions of old classics, they should have it included in the titles so we know what we are getting (i.e. ‘The New and Re-imagined Camelot!’) I will give the Muny one more chance and hopefully see ‘Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat’ but I must confess, I’m scared what they will do to it. If that one is ‘re-imagined’ as well, I will not be returning to a venue I used to attend weekly.
I have seen the comments elsewhere, and I disagree. Theatre is not like a painting. It’s live, and no production you see (whether using the original script or not) will be the same. Each new production has a different production team, director, actors, etc. Nothing is going to be exactly like the original production. Also, with shows like Camelot and Paint Your Wagon, the original script is hardly ever done anymore. Even more “traditional” productions have had changes to the script. I have never seen two productions of Camelot that used the exact same script and songs. I could go into detail, but that would take too long. As for Paint Your Wagon, what most people remember now is the movie, which is very different from the original stage show, which is rarely (if ever) performed these days. If you were were expecting the movie plot, you would have been disappointed if you saw the original show. Theatre changes, and no two productions are going to be the same. Some changes may be more extreme than others, and you have every right to dislike the more extreme changes. Still, I applaud the Muny for making bold decisions, even when they don’t always work out.
As for acting, pacing, singing, etc., that is also a matter of opinion. I write this blog to share my own thoughts. I don’t expect everyone to agree with me. I hope you enjoy Joseph!
I’m going to agree with you about ‘revisioning’. I have had season tickets to the Muny for nearly 40 years and have seen my share of revisionings. Some I have liked very much…others not. I think people have to realize that even without revisionings, you never see the same production twice. I can go Tu and Th, I will see to different productions.
That said, I was at Camelot, and while I have fond memories of seeing Robert Goulet play Arthur many, many years ago, I may have enjoyed this version of Camelot more than any I’ve seen!
On the other hand, I was at Mary Poppins last night, and left it a bit disappointed.The 2nd half was excellent, but the 1st half dragged, and the story had been changed a bit. (I don’t remember ‘the holy terror’ from previous versions).
Some shows are better than others, but I always enjoy the Muny and will continue to support it.
Thanks for your comments! I’ve noticed that this production of Camelot has been polarizing. For me, I’m fine with the Muny changing things up. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn’t, and this time, I enjoyed it, although I wasn’t in love with all of the changes. Keeping theatre fresh is a good thing, as far as I’m concerned.
As for Mary Poppins, I just put up my review, and I loved it. It’s the best production of the stage show I’ve seen, but I saw a different performance than you did, and that could explain it somewhat. As for Miss Andrew (the “Holy Terror”), she has always been in the stage show, although she wasn’t in the movie. When the stage production was made, they revised the book to add characters and situations from the Mary Poppins books. There are also additional songs, and some new lyrics to some of the movie songs, as well as different settings for some of them. It’s different from the movie, and I think I will always prefer the film (it has been a favorite of mine for a long time), but I do enjoy the stage show, as well, and especially with this production because I thought the casting was especially strong.
I rarely comment on posts — it makes me anxious to stick my head out of the foxhole — but I’m going to here.
Camelot is a really personal show to me. It was my mom’s favorite show, and she used to sing songs from Camelot to me and my siblings when we when were babies. My mom passed away when I was a teenager, and I knew seeing this show would be emotional for me.
Even with the strong emotional attachment to this show, I really liked this revision. I know this was a controversial staging, and I heard some murmurings around me that other theatergoers were confused. I’ll admit that not every choice worked for me — but that’s fine. Not every choice has to. I really appreciated the framing device that this was a story being told – and retold – over and over again. Of people living in a broken world, telling a story about people trying to form a better one, trying to get it right. I found it really moving. Especially now.
I’m 31, and my husband and I have season tickets to The Muny. I know that we’re on the younger side of Muny subscribers, and the creative decisions need to appeal to a wide range of people. But I appreciate that they’re taking bigger swings with their casting (wider body types, BIPOC actors, actors with disabilities) and mounting revivals with different framings and perspectives. I think if we freeze classics as they are, it’s harder for people to engage with the medium. And I think there’s a time and a place for both classic revivals and newer interpretations, and The Muny is doing pretty well at balancing both.
P.S. Really excited to find this blog! It’s hard to find write-ups of St. Louis theatre, and I’m so happy you’re doing the work that you are! Thank you!
Thanks for your great comments! You have an excellent attitude, and it’s always great to see younger audiences supporting theatre! Thanks so much reading my blog!
Kevin I have a similar experience to you with my mother and growing up with Camelot and it holds such a special place in my heart. Although I found the Muny production extremely disappointing and crushing those beautiful memories. I honestly contemplated walking out as I saw many others doing but I stayed till the end. To me it was like cutting up a beautiful wedding dress and repurposing it to use it for placemats.
This production of CAMELOT was very disappointing. I have been in four productions at The Muny, including the three previous to this one. I am also on the Board. I have never seen so many people leave the show at intermission and I have never gotten so many complaints from season ticket holders and donors as I have for this production. I completely understood their dismay. First, there was no overture and the orchestra was limited to nine pieces. The truncated rewrite of the script was designed for a smaller venue not the largest Equity theater in the country. Two of the three leads were recent college graduates with little depth in the portrayal of their characters. Guenavere had a pleasant signing voice. Lancelot’s voice was thin and lacked the richness and power required of the character. Arthur also lacked a voice with presence and strength in both dialogue and song. The sets were ugly and the setting looked dingier than the SWEENEY TODD set—with some pieces from CAMELOT being reused for that production. The costumes were also ugly and reminiscent of “Mad Max” or “Escape from New York.” They were more of a distraction than the sets. The ending was anticlimactic and confusing. One seasoned theater goer said she was sure that the show had ended. Some callers were thinking of asking for their money back because this was not the CAMELOT they had purchased tickets for. I have not heard from anyone who liked this production production including experienced audience members and donors. The only positive things I’ve read are from some reviews. I couldn’t disagree more with those opinions.
You have every right to disagree. I have definitely seen better productions of this show, but I didn’t think it was bad, and I’m all for taking risks in the theatre, even when they aren’t entirely successful. I see there are a lot of passionate opinions about this production, and I’ve never had as many comments on one review before! I have seen several productions of Camelot over the years, and while this wasn’t the best I’ve seen, it wasn’t the worst, either. I would describe it as “good but not great”, and for the most part, I enjoyed it. So far though, I think this has been a great season for the Muny overall.