Gender Roles: Opposed; Unique: No by Hails Shager

 Musicals are so wonderful because of their careful consideration of plot, music, lyrics, acting, dancing, and technical elements.  If a show is extremely strong in at least four of those categories, and decent in the other two, it’s likely to be enjoyed by most.  But what if that’s reversed, and a show only has two extremely strong elements?  Billy Elliot is a show about a young boy who wants to dance ballet, but comes from an unapproving family of coal miners in 1980’s England.  Eventually his father comes around, and he gets into a selective ballet school.  That is the full plot of the three hour long show, and although it was humorous, and the dance numbers and set were very impressive, they did not offset the fact that this show was two hours too long.

Being a musical about dancing, the choreography and execution was very well done throughout this show.  Elliott Hanna, the actor for Billy Elliot in the Broadway HD production, was incredible in every number he danced in.  He was the 34th and youngest ever Billy Elliot in London, opening at just 10 years old in 2013.  He is exactly 5 days older than me, and although there were times when he was pitchy while singing, his acting and dancing was wonderful throughout the show and I feel in no position to judge him considering while he was performing in front of hundreds, I was tripping over the Gangnam Style dance in my bedroom.  The numbers “Angry Dance” and “Swan Lake” were especially memorable and impressive because of his ability to perform technically while continuously keeping his face emotive. Another memorable piece of the show was a very cool set piece for Billy’s bed that swiveled in and out of the stage while acting as stairs.  

There were a few very important questions that I found myself asking while viewing.  What is the appeal of a show starring children or a child when there are thousands of actors who have studied musical and theatrical elements for decades?  The material also tends to not be as relatable to the average audience member, and personally,  I would always prefer a show about teenagers or adults than one that has to cast children actors with very specific ages and skill sets.

           Another question was about the balance between current cultural normalities, and standards for the time period a show was written in.  Gender is viewed very differently now in 2021 than it was both in 2005 when the show debuted, and in 1984 when the show takes place.  The centerpiece of this show is a young boy doing an activity that is abnormal for his gender, and his male family members having a negative reaction to it.  Toxic masculinity is a very real and negative thing that still exists in many people’s lives, but is there a necessity in 2021 to watch a three hour long musical with a fully white cast and mediocre singing about a working class 11 year old who wants to dance against his family’s wishes?  For me, the answer is no, but I would understand the desire to watch it if this does sound like an interesting topic to you.  The humour and dancing will keep you entertained throughout most of the show, and although it wasn’t worth my time personally, I can fully understand if it is worth yours depending on what you are interested in.