Saturday, August 30, 2014

My Perfectly Smashing Suggested Setlist for Billy Corgan Tonight, Tonight at Ravinia

My interest admittedly abetted by half-price pavilion seats available through Goldstar, tonight I will be seeing Billy Corgan of the Smashing Pumpkins do a solo show at Ravinia.

Through his multiple incarnations with the Pumpkins, Zwan and on his own, this will be the 25th time I have seen Billy live on stage--more than anyone than except Bruce Springsteen (with 44 attendances).

So it's not that I am an "only with cheap seats" fan of his, but between having seen him so many times and--though I won't delve deep into it here--Corgan's tendency to exasperate even devoted followers with head-scratching antics, actions, statements and setlist choices, going tonight wasn't a slam-dunk decision (especially being the birthday weekend of my best friend since Kindergarten, but he's now coming to town next weekend).

But along with an abiding curiosity, a true love of much of the music he's made, a desire to get to Ravinia at least once this year and a great ticket deal, a few things acutely prompted my decision to see Billy Corgan tonight. (I'll hopefully post a review here tomorrow or Monday.)

First of all--though for prose purposes this isn't quite in chronological order--I noticed that a Facebook Friend named Jim Ryan, who is a music blogger and local radio & TV traffic reporter/anchor/host, had done an extensive interview with Corgan on his Rock 'n Roll Radio Program and spoke highly of Billy's amity and candor.

I've only heard the first of two parts so far (which you can do here, or read a transcription here at Jim's Chicago at Night blog). Jim does a nice job with the interview and Billy doesn't come off too badly, but I don't think he ever helps himself by talking at length.

Honestly, if all Corgan ever said was "I take my music seriously and try to write songs of substance--some appealing to the casual fan, some that may only reach a few in this increasingly fractionalized musical universe--and just hope to leave a mark," I think he would remain much more popular and relevant, with much less fan attrition since the Pumpkins' '90s heyday. (Heck, he's even lost the 3 other original Pumpkins.)

I also enjoyed hearing--because someone had posted it to Jim Ryan's Facebook wall--Billy perform a never-before-played song called "Chicago" that he debuted recently in promoting the Ravinia show on WGN-TV news. 

If nothing else, this reiterates what a gifted songwriter Billy Corgan is.

But my interest was also peaked by seeing that Corgan had posted (on the Smashing Pumpkins website) an invitation for fans to submit a 20-song "Dream Setlist" for his show at Ravinia.

I didn't really care much about the prize of a private Meet & Greet with Billy--if Jordan had come up for his birthday, I would have skipped the show altogether, even if I had won the contest--but thought it made for a fun exercise.

At the time of entry, I didn't know that Billy was intending to play acoustic, or at least sans band (current Smashing Pumpkins guitarist Jeff Schroeder will be joining him) so I didn't really draft this proposed set with that in mind.

But knowing that this was a solo show, at which material spanning his entire oeuvre was likely, including some lesser-known songs, I tried to make my list fan-friendly to both the hardcore and casual. After all, he is playing Ravinia--in his adopted hometown of Highland Park, where he also operates a Tea cafe called Madame Zuzu's--which is notorious for chatter on the lawn overpowering even the most famous songs, let alone rendering rarities rather colorless. (I'll be sitting in the pavilion, but have experienced music "wafting over the lawn" more than enough.)

Rather than really expecting to win, or even sway Billy, my submission more so represented what I would like to hear tonight. More on this below the setlist, but I didn't win; also, Billy has said he will actually be playing 27 songs, not 20.

Also below the setlist, I have embedded a Spotify playlist of most of the songs I cited; a few aren't on Spotify, so if possible I've provided a YouTube link. All are Smashing Pumpkins' songs, except as noted.

As entered in the contest, here is my suggested setlist for Billy Corgan on Saturday, August 30 at Ravinia Festival in Highland Park, IL:

1. Tonight Reprise
2. Stand Inside Your Love
3. Cast A Stone  (a never released Zwan song; YouTube)
4. Drown
5. Daphne Descends
6. Bullet With Butterfly Wings
7. Riverview (from a planned but never released solo album about Chicago; YouTube) 
8. Disarm
9. Let Me Give The World To You (a great Pumpkins outtake from Adore, later released on the Machina II online album; still one of Billy's best songs. YouTube)
10. Tarantula
11. This Time
12. The Chimera
13. Today
14. Declarations of Faith (one of several great songs from the only Zwan album; YouTube)
15. Mayonaise

16. Mellon Collie And The Infinite Sadness
17. Muzzle
18. Cherub Rock
19. 1979
20. The Last Song

After having heard "Chicago," I would also include that one.

But as I said above, I didn't win. Though I thought I was being deferential to some of the more serious fans, if Billy saw my list he likely laughed it off for being far too populist.

As Billy revealed here, nearly 1,000 entries were submitted and the winner was Gustaf Bjorlin whose setlist--"although quite different than the one I plan to play"--was as follows:


Obviously Mr. Bjorlin is a dedicated fan, and there's plenty of "Gustaf" included in his setlist, but it's far too esoteric for my tastes.

Honestly--another great Zwan song--on what should be a nice night, I'll be happy to hear whatever one of my musical heroes wants to play, especially given the unique setting and format.

Plugged-in and gloriously overamplified, my setlist would be "Perfect," at least to me.

But even in an acoustic vein, I hope I get to hear some of the above, "Tonight Tonight."

I'll let you know.

Thursday, August 28, 2014

Pithy Philosophies #19

Seth Saith:

Life is fun. Have it. 

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

With Unrelenting, Unrivaled Audiovisual Barrage, Arcade Fire Proves Themselves Singular -- Chicago Concert Review

Concert Review

Arcade Fire
w/ opening act Devo
plus DJ Dan Deacon
United Center, Chicago
August 26, 2014

Before going to the United Center on Tuesday night for Arcade Fire's first of two concerts there, I thought--having seen them twice before--that I might open this review by opining that they are the best band to arise in the 21st century.

Following the show, not only has that status been resoundingly reaffirmed, but I would even suggest that Arcade Fire has established itself as one of the best live acts in rock history.

Heady praise, I know. Perhaps hyperbolic. 

And if propagated by a post-show haze, so be it. (Though several hours have now passed.)

But, if anything, these acclamations may be more acute and constrictive than they need to be.

Even in loosely defining "arising in the 21st century" and with due respect to the White Stripes, Coldplay, the Killers, Black Keys, System of a Down and others--all of whom I like--it's not as is there have been a plethora of really great contemporary rock bands, especially among any still extant.

And while, at least today--specifically--I would give Arcade Fire the nod over any of the aforementioned, due to a combination of recorded and concert prowess (and consistency), none of their songs or even albums would likely rank among my Top 50, or even 100 or more, favorites of all-time.

Which oddly helps to connote why I have found them--once again--to be such a magnificent live act.

The band--more like an orchestra as there were up to 12 members onstage at a time--certainly have many terrific songs from four good-to-great albums, but it's not as if their catalog compares to that of Bruce Springsteen, Paul McCartney, the Rolling Stones, Neil Young, Billy Joel, U2 or most of the "legacy acts" that now largely comprise my concert calendar.

But not only is there something inherently entrancing about seeing a band clearly in their prime--something I ruefully rarely am inspired to do these days, given the sparsity of new acts I know and like--but as concert performers, the Montreal-based collective goes exponentially beyond what their recorded oeuvre would suggest.

In other words, with clearly well-planned, practiced and presented stagecraft, Arcade Fire greatly amplifies their material--in multiple contexts.

I have attended hundreds of concerts in arenas, most frequently sitting in the highest level, but until Tuesday night I don't recall sitting in the 3rd deck of the United Center and having my seat rattle throughout the show.

In terms of sheer sonic force, I can't readily think of any concerts that have--well, rocked--me to the same extent.

AC/DC and Metallica come to mind, but those are basically power chord, bass and drum assaults.

With pianos, horns, violins, bongo drums and the typical rock gear, Arcade Fire's blast is one of instrumentation with greater depth and breadth than anyone--not even Springsteen with the mighty E Street band is as aurally rich and thunderous.

It's hard to describe, especially as while one can readily imagine many influences--Talking Heads, David Bowie, Springsteen, LCD Soundsystem, punk bands and much more--Arcade Fire isn't readily comparable to anyone else. But perhaps try to imagine a Wilco-Nirvana mashup and you may get a sense of what Arcade Fire sounds like live.

And with a variety of visual accoutrements--including costumes, masks, background videos, elaborate lighting, even a group of men proudly dancing in effeminate fashion during "We Exist"--Arcade Fire made their concert feel almost like a party.

Speaking of parties, I was rather late to discovering Arcade Fire's power & prowess as a live act.

I liked their much-acclaimed debut album, Funeral, and got their second, Neon Bible, but even in appreciating 2010's The Suburbs and seeing a full streaming concert around its release, I really didn't know "what the fuss was all about" until seeing them in April 2011 at the UIC Pavilion.

My review of that show was rather similarly fawning to this one, so although I can identify with any skepticism of those who have never seen Arcade Fire--especially indoors--I wasn't all that surprised by how good they were at the United Center.

Yet I was still awestruck astonished.

Of 20 songs played over a near 2-hour show, seven were from 2013's Reflektor, which being a double album with a prevalent dance vibe, isn't as thorough satisfying as earlier albums. For other bands featuring so much new material might have seemed dubious.

But not a single song dragged and the title tune, "Joan of Arc" (restarted after a technical snafu), "Afterlife" and "Normal Person" were among the show's highlights.

Of course, "Neighborhood 3 (Power Out)," "Month of May," "The Suburbs," "Keep the Car Running," "No Cars Go," "Ready to Start," "Rebellion (Lies)," "Sprawl II" and "Wake Up" were also tremendous.

(See the full 8/26/14 setlist for Arcade Fire in Chicago on

After bringing David Johansen, David Byrne and Marky Ramone onstage at recent New York shows--exacerbating Arcade Fire's trend of playing a locally-relevant cover--it was a bit disappointing that Tuesday night brought no special Chicago guest, merely a rendition of "Who Do You Love?" by Bo Diddley, who I've never much identified with the Windy City (wrongly, per Wikipedia).

But while I will feel a twinge of envy if I hear that Billy Corgan or Dennis DeYoung showed up on Wednesday, in a way Arcade Fire was so good on their own that a gimmicky special guest may have felt a tad unnecessary or even off-putting. (Note: Mavis Staples joined the band Wednesday for a version of the Rolling Stones, "The Last Time," which has no obvious ties to Chicago, not having been recorded at Chess Records' studios.)

For as it were, in terms of getting satisfaction from my ticket purchase back in late 2013, Arcade Fire had me at "Devo."

Though I've always known of the Ohio-based artsy punkish band--largely via their flowerpot hats and ubiquitous 1980 single "Whip It"--I now realize they are a band I should have seen live long before their opening stint for Arcade Fire.

Running through a terrific set of songs--I had done some pre-show Spotifying but not much--that included "Girl You Want," "Whip It," "Uncontrollable Urge," "Mongoloid," "Freedom of Choice," "Jocko Homo" (a.k.a. "We are Devo") and "Beautiful World--while undergoing three costume changes without leaving the stage (except for lead singer Mark Mothersbaugh), Devo sounded incredible.

In between their set and Arcade Fire, a DJ named Dan Deacon led a variety of audience-participation dance-offs on the General Admission arena floor.

On another night, having seen two fans in frog costumes dancing for the masses may have merited mentioning a bit earlier, or even a photograph. Heck, I haven't even mentioned that Arcade Fire took the stage after walking through the crowd on the floor.

There's actually a number of things I've left unsaid, including naming any of the band members. 

But I'm ready for bed and I think you've gotten the point.

Though--as with Springsteen, still my favorite ever performer of any ilk--one won't really get it until they see for themselves.

While it won't nearly do being there justice, here's a clip of the show closing "Wake Up" that I shot, which includes lead singer Win Butler's shout-out to Derrick Rose: 

Sunday, August 24, 2014

Petty Criticism: Early Rockers Too Sparse, but New Songs Lift Heartbreakers Above Mid-Tempo Groove -- Chicago Concert Review

Concert Review

Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers
w/ opening act Steve Winwood
United Center, Chicago
August 23, 2014

The first rock concert I attended of my own volition was by Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers on June 17, 1981, when I was just 12 years old.

As part of a radio promotion, The Loop--WLUP 97.9 FM, which still exists today--bought all tickets to Petty's concert at the Rosemont Horizon (on the Hard Promises tour) and gave them away.

By virtue of standing in line at the FlipSide at Lincoln Village, I got a pair, and my dad took me to the show.

Although I was happy to be there--though dissuaded from buying a $12 concert jersey--I remember thinking how much older my dad seemed than everyone else there.

He was just a year older than I am now, and 18 years younger than Tom Petty is.

And by the looks of the crowd at Saturday night's show at the United Center, I am not the only one who is growing old with the Heartbreakers.

Though a bit oddly, unlike my dad, I was on the young side of the full house.

Including last night, I have now seen Tom Petty and his erstwhile band eight times since 1981 and, while with the last being in 2008 I have never before written a review, they would all largely have had the same gist as this one...

That while I love the man, his band and their music, enough to see them every time they tour--and have always liked them in concert--I haven't loved Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers as a live act as much as I want to.

Tour after tour, and again Saturday night at the UC, Petty includes several of the same mid-tempo songs from 1989-1993 as staples: "I Won't Back Down," "Learning to Fly," "Mary Jane's Last Dance" and "Free Fallin'"

All of these are good songs individually--and clear singalong crowd pleasers for most--with the latter being one of my favorites of Petty's entire catalog.

But with three of these songs among the first 8 played, along with a lesser-played one of similar era and ilk--"Into the Great Wide Open"--and two covers ("So You Wanna Be a Rock 'n Roll Star" and "Baby, Please Don't Go"), it was hard for me to "get into" the show early on as much as I wanted.

And a similar vibe weighted down a good portion of the rest of the 2-hour show, as well. (See the full Tom Petty Chicago setlist on

This is largely because the great Mr. Petty, while showing he has written many a catchy pop song, wasn't letting one of the greatest American rock bands of all-time rock.

Yes, the band burned on the tail end of "Baby, Please Don't Go" and sounded invigorated in showcasing songs from Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers' really terrific new album, Hypnotic Eye, their best since the 1980s. 

"American Dream Plan B," "Forgotten Man," "U Get Me High" and "Shadow People" all came off well and showed--like other favorites Bruce Springsteen and Pearl Jam--that despite being hugely successful for decades, Petty still has common-man empathy and is emphatically (and melodically) angered by the financial & societal injustices that continue to proliferate.

But though in one way it's a great testament to Petty & his band (including Mike Campbell, Benmont Tench, Ron Blair, Steve Ferrone and an additional sideman, Scott Thurston) to say that his newest songs were among the concert's highlights--and this is without their playing my three favorite Hypnotic Eye tracks: "Fault Lines," "Red River" and "All You Can Carry"--there's also a considerable quibble that it exposes.

For years I have been telling anyone who would listen--mainly just me--that I really wish Petty would mine his great pre-1983 catalog much deeper in concert.

Album tracks like "A Thing About You," "Straight Into Darkness," "Change of Heart," "Kings Road," "One Story Town" and "Runaway Trains" (the latter from 1987) are among TP & the HB's best songs, along with better-known cuts "I Need to Know," "Listen to Her Heart," "Don't Do Me Like That," "Even the Losers," "The Waiting," and "You Got Lucky"  that were included on their 1993 Greatest Hits album. (Check out My Petty Setlist on Spotify.)

Yet none of these were played on Saturday night, and many never or rarely at Petty shows I've seen.

And just when I began to think that maybe I was being a Petty douchebag for getting frustrated at one of my favorite artists playing what he wants to play rather that what I'd prefer to hear--especially as he's still filling stadiums at 63 and Saturday's crowd was raucously appreciative--he and the band ripped through Hard Promises' "A Woman In Love (It's Not Me)."

Per, this was just the second time this tour the 1981 song was played, and it sounded really fantastic. Validating--along with stellar renditions of early hits but longtime concert staples "Refugee" and "American Girl"--my sense that it would intensify Petty's concerts, my emotional investment and my satisfaction if he would occasionally throw in a few of the songs I cited a few paragraphs back.

Certainly I understand that Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers long ago earned the right to play what they want to play, and--given the full house and great applause, for which Tom effusively expressed his gratitude--they're obviously still doing a whole lot right.

Including, in the eyes of many--whether seeing the band for the first time or repeatedly like me--trotting out "Learning to Fly" and "Mary Jane's Last Dance" again and again in lieu of ripping through more MIA early rockers.

To Petty's credit, relative rarities "Rebels," "Angel Dream (No. 2)" and "Yer So Bad"--played consecutively, with beautiful, sparse acoustic takes on the first two--sounded wonderful, further reiterating the benefit of mixing things up a bit.

And my @@@@ rating (out of 5) genuinely means to connote that I liked the show much more than I didn't.

But in a year in which I've seen several all-time favorites--Bruce Springsteen, Neil Young, Paul McCartney, Billy Joel, Elvis Costello, John Fogerty, Paul Simon (+ Sting), Ringo Starr, Bob Mould--plus artists whose oeuvres I know & like considerably less than Petty's (such as Santana, Richard Thompson, New Order and Barry Gibb), in being truthful I must admit that I enjoyed his performance less than any of theirs.

Though I will say that in addition to sending me out into the night rather buoyantly with a closing run of "Refugee," "Runnin' Down a Dream," "You Wreck Me" and "American Girl"--with a cover of The Monkees' "(I'm Not Your) Stepping Stone" also in the encores--Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers made sure the first hour was quite pleasing by enlisting the legendary Steve Winwood as an opening act.

At 66 and sporting gray mutton chops, the man who sang "Gimme Some Lovin'" at 16 (with the Spencer Davis Group) still sounds strong of voice, and is an extraordinary musician on piano/organ and guitar.

Winwood's hourlong opening set was a bit more relaxed than emphatic, but with a pair of drummers, a sax player and a guitarist, some truly fantastic songs--Spencer Davis Group's "I'm A Man," Blind Faith's "Can't Find My Way Home," Traffic's "Low Spark of High-Heeled Boys," "Empty Pages," "Dear Mr. Fantasy" and Winwood's solo hit "Higher Love"--were done adequate justice, and once it filled in, the crowd bestowed a well-deserved ovation.

I would have loved to have heard "While You See a Chance," but Winwood was good enough in exploring his past glories--if only in small part--to make me wish to see him do another headlining show.

He also played with Petty in 2008 at the United Center, and with Eric Clapton the following year.

But if he wants to hit the Chicago Theatre or a similar venue with his fine band, I'll be there.

And I'll probably be back the next time Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers come through town.

Still hoping to hear more of the old...and more of the new. 

Here's Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers' terrific version of "A Woman In Love (It's Not Me)" posted to YouTube by ZepCowboy:

Friday, August 22, 2014

A Fun Night 'On the Town': Initial Local Docking of Classic Musical Should "Shore Leave" You Smiling -- Chicago Theater Review

Theater Review

On the Town
a classic musical never before
professionally-staged in the Chicago area
Marriott Theatre Lincolnshire
Thru October 12

I likely have more sentimentality for On the Town than for any other musical that--prior to Wednesday night--I had never seen onstage.

That's because, being a favorite of my father's, the classic MGM movie version of On the Town--starring Gene Kelly, Frank Sinatra, Ann Miller and others--was probably aired in my childhood home more than any musical besides Singin' in the Rain (and perhaps Guys & Dolls). 

But since I began attending live musicals with regularity in 2000, I have never seen On the Town, nor even noted it being staged anywhere prior to its current run at the Marriott Theatre in Lincolnshire. (A new Broadway revival is set to begin in October.)

In fact, I can't say I ever knew that On the Town began its existence as a 1944 stage musical, rather than an MGM film from 1949, as was the case with Singin' in the Rain (in 1952).

Perhaps this is because--as astonishing as it was to learn from the program when I arrived at the Marriott Theatre--no professional production of On the Town has ever been staged in Chicago or the vicinity. 

Supposedly there was a national tour soon after the Broadway run 70 years ago, but it didn't play Chicago, and there are no records of any other professional staging in the area. 

In reading about the show, and movie, on Wikipedia before arriving at the Marriott Lincolnshire on Wednesday night, I learned that while two of the songs I fondly recalled from the movie--"New York, New York" (the "it's a helluva town" one, not "Start spreading the news..," though both have Sinatra in common) and "Come Up to My Place"--came from the stage musical, for the most part MGM had new songs written for the film. 

Supposedly, many of the tunes composed by Leonard Bernstein with lyrics by Betty Comden and Adolph Green--future Broadway legends creating their first musical, as with choreographer Jerome Robbins--were considered too operatic in nature for Hollywood and movie screens across America. 

So an intriguing panoply of factors were at play when I took my seat Wednesday night: a classic title that I--and likely many in the senior-heavy audience--regarded fondly, yet a work never before seen locally in live form, featuring a score far less familiar than initially imagined. 

And while I have seen numerous musicals at Marriott and other relatively congruent regional theaters over the years, making for casts often filled with familiar faces, that was not the case here. 

To meet the dance-heavy needs of the show, director David H. Bell and choreographer Alex Sanchez conducted extensive auditions in Chicago and New York, resulting in three lead actors I had never before seen. (A couple other cast members were familiar.)

Expanded from an idea that began as a ballet by Robbins with music by Bernstein, On the Town centers around three World War II U.S. Navy sailors on shore leave who explore New York City for the first time, for just one day. 

As Gabey, Chip and Ozzie, respectively, Max Clayton, Seth Danner and Jeff Smith are all engaging, well-sung and fine dancers, though considerably less charismatic and distinctive than Gene Kelly, Frank Sinatra and Jules Munshin (the same could be said for nearly everyone in history, at least regarding the first two, though Munshin was also great in the movie). 

From the first notes of the overture, Bernstein's score is delightful, including fine renditions of the songs I knew well--Danner and Marya Grandy (as Hildy) are great fun on "Come Up to My Place"--as well as those I was likely hearing for the first-time, such as "Carried Away," "Lonely Town," "Lucky to Be Me" and "Ya Got Me."

In doing an excellent job as Hildy, a romantically aggressive cabbie who becomes Chip's love interest--played in the movie by Betty Garrett--Grandy also delivers a pleasing rendition of "I Can Cook," a well-known song from the musical that didn't make the movie.

Alison Jantzie is endearing as Ivy, who in being featured as the NYC subway system's "Miss Turnstiles" drives the narrative, as Gabey--with help from his friends--pursues her, initially trying to locate her within a city of millions based on seeing a poster.

Also quite good are two actresses I have seen in past shows, Johanna McKenzie as the punnily named Claire DeLoone, the love interest of Ozzie despite being engaged to a dweeb named Pitkin (Alex Goodrich), and the always fabulous Barbara Robertson, who gives the show's most memorable performance as Madame Maude P. Dilly, a vocal coach working with Ivy.

I was pleasantly surprised at how LOL funny the 70-year-old dialogue is at several points, even beyond the comic relief characters of Pitkin, Madame Dilly and Hildy's roommate Lucy Schmeeler (Brandi Wooten), who has a sinus condition akin to Niagara Falls.

Not surprisingly, given the consistently high standards of quality at Marriott Theatre--said to boast the largest subscriber base of any U.S. theater--everything about the inaugural production of On the Town was impressive.

Beyond the score, songs, some wonderfully witty lyrics and humorous dialogue, Sanchez' choreography, Nancy Missimi's costumes, Thomas Ryan's scenic design and a large ensemble cast under Bell's direction are all demonstrably good. Particularly notable for when the show was written, multiple ballet and/or group dance numbers and substantive use of brass in Bernstein's score are quite pleasing, and Bell's staging of a scene in the Museum of Natural History is tremendously inventive.

Yet at the end of the night--and even at the end of Act I, which like Act II, concludes rather abruptly with little emotional uplift--my sense was more of thorough enjoyment than effusive wonderment.

There is nothing specific I would cite as deficient, but whether it was the pacing or perhaps the show's charming-but-atypical near complete lack of modernity, something about On the Town didn't congeal perfectly.

The sum, in sum, somehow wound up being somewhat lesser than its many wonderful parts.

Still, anyone who embarks on Chicagoland's maiden voyage of a legendary but exceedingly rare musical, whose creators would go on to create shows such as West Side Story and Wonderful Town, is almost "shore" to leave more than abundantly entertained--and even enriched--from their night On the Town.

It's a helluva time.

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

Even in a More Pedestrian Locale, 'Avenue Q' Retains Its Mastery of Puppets -- Chicago Theater Review

Theater Review

Avenue Q
a local production directed by L. Walter Stearns
Mercury Theater, Chicago
Thru October 26

With the Mercury Theater's self-produced staging--complete with an original set of puppets created just for this production--Avenue Q is finally getting the extended run Chicago has long deserved but was foolishly deprived.

Obviously inspired by and indebted to Sesame Street but in no way officially affiliated with the historic PBS children's show, the brilliantly irreverent musical featuring occasionally raunchy puppets and an impishly tuneful score opened on Broadway in July 2003 after a brief off-Broadway run.

I saw Avenue Q in New York in May 2004, shortly before it upset Wicked for the Best New Musical Tony Award--in my eyes deservedly so (and I love Wicked as well). 

It switched back from Broadway to Off-Broadway at some point in 2009, but is still running in the Big Apple.

Usually any new show that is hugely successful on Broadway comes to Chicago on a national tour within the next year or two and--as with Wicked, Jersey Boys, Billy Elliot, Motown and others--may stay for months or even years.

But until the Mercury's local production, Avenue Q--which has run virtually nonstop in New York for 11 years and counting--was only in Chicago for a total of three weeks on two separate tour visits. And not until much later than it should have been.

I am admittedly fuzzy on the process and seemingly variable timetable for a show transitioning from being presented across the country only by its original Broadway producing team to becoming licensable for regional theaters to create their own productions, but the latter seems now to be the case whereas the former was seemingly in effect until recently.

In a decision that certainly didn't work out as well as planned, hot off Avenue Q's initial Broadway success, rather than launch a typical National Tour and/or book a dedicated Chicago "sit-down" (i.e. long-term) production, the show's producers decided instead to open a longstanding (in theory) Las Vegas production at the then-new Wynn Hotel & Casino.

I made a point of seeing it in Vegas in 2005 and loved it again, as I did when a tour finally came to Chicago in 2007--for a still absurdly short two weeks--and again in 2010 for just one.

It's a shame that a review of an excellent homegrown Chicago version of what remains one of the 21st century's best musicals has to begin with a recap of Avenue Q's shortsighted business history, but in this proud theater town it's somewhat part and parcel to rue that the Q never put down lengthy roots here before.

Especially as all the reasons thousands likely would have filled a downtown theater for months on end in 2005 or 2006 still largely apply, even if the show's daring invective feels a bit dated and even docile in an age where internet snark is epidemic.

But at a time when the economy and the employment market remain in shambles for far too many--despite whatever deceptive statistics are trotted out--early Act I songs like "What Do You Do with a B.A. in English?" and "It Sucks to Be Me" still strike a hilarious but all-too-resonant chord.

The terrific score by Robert Lopez and Jeff Marx--the former going on to collaborate on The Book of Mormon and the smash Disney movie Frozen--is not only fiendishly funny, but with songs like "Everyone's a Little Bit Racist," "The Internet is for Porn" and "I Wish I Could Go Back to College," the lyrics make many sly and striking statements.

Even without listening to the Original Broadway Cast Album anytime recently, I knew every lyric and much of the dialogue upon catching a performance last weekend, so even if I didn't guffaw as profusely as others or in the past, I could discern that the Mercury players replicated the singing, acting and puppetry extremely well.

The show chronicles residents of the fictional Avenue Q in New York--a real one does exist--some of whom are puppets whose mouths and (partial) bodies move in unison with onstage actors/puppeteers who do the speaking and singing. But other neighborhood denizens are simply human beings, with no doppelgänger puppets involved. And some puppets need two puppeteers to operate them.

The Mercury Theatre in Chicago, just up Southport Avenue from the Music Box Theatre, isn't tiny--though just a fraction of the Broadway in Chicago theaters downtown--and multiple extensions have given Avenue Q a healthy run that will end on October 26.

But though longtime Chicago theater director and current Mercury artistic director L. Walter Stearns likely factored in the local sparsity of Avenue Q before mounting this production--which he directs--the quality of this rendition is even more estimable given that such a long run wasn't assured when it opened in the spring.

While I--or you--could be forgiven for imagining that some of Avenue Q's fine points might be diminished on a street other than Broadway, Randolph or the like, and without the original puppets created by Rick Lyon, that isn't the case.

The source material may not feel quite as fresh, or even revolutionary, as it once did, but the production values at the Mercury Theater are first-rate all the way. If you've never seen Avenue Q, or even if you have, you should genuinely love this version without any disclaimers. (Find tickets through the box office here or check on commonly-available discounts through HotTix.)

With the note that Avenue Q actually works far better in a smaller theater than a mammoth one, the scenic design by Alan Donahue--essentially consisting of a series of 3-flats--compares sufficiently to anything I remember on Broadway, Vegas or downtown Chicago stages, and slyly incorporates custom-made video accoutrements that don't shortchange the original ones.

The cast is terrific throughout in all phases of their on-stage duties--including acting and singing while imbuing the puppets with congruent expressions--and with Stearns having commissioned puppets from a company affiliated with the late, great Jim Henson (of Muppets fame), all those "on hand" are Broadway-caliber.

Though Avenue Q is largely-known and oft-promoted for being rather risque in its language and themes, not only is there a whole lot of intelligence in its irreverence, but there's also a lot of heart.

So while I knew all the songs, jokes, gags, etc.--including the continued characterization of a comedic TV actor who in real-life passed away since Avenue Q was created--what especially makes the Mercury's take work anew is how well the show's love story is handled.

I never like to reveal too much, but will share that in both operating and personalizing puppets named Princeton and Kate Monster who quickly become romantically-inclined, Jackson Evans and Leah Morrow are really superb.

Both are strong of voice, but also demonstrably good in creating empathy for their puppet and human selves. I'd be lying to suggest I specifically remember the nuances of previous performers who have "played" Kate, but it's hard to envision anyone doing it more gracefully and engagingly than Morrow.

Without implying that Evans or others in the cast aren't also deft at this, she seemed to perfectly echo every one of Kate Monster's movements and emotions with her own (and/or vice-versa).

At the end of this century's first decade, I declared Avenue Q my second favorite new musical of those 10 years (behind only The Producers); that remains true, and I don't think anything has overtaken it since 2010.

So even if the impudence has lost just a bit of punch a good bit down the road, and even as it has moved to less-famed theatrical neighborhoods, Avenue Q is still a joy to revisit.

The Mercury Theater makes for a fine address at which to catch an exemplary and reasonably-priced staging that does justice to the original, while proving that previous decisions to delay and limit the show's local delivery clearly never made much street sense.

Monday in the Park with Pippin, Annie and Dee: Photos of the Broadway in Chicago Summer Concert at Millennium Park

Monday night, the pavilion and lawn in front of Pritzker Pavilion were packed, far more so than at free concerts by notable rock acts Bob Mould, Richard Thompson and The Both that I attended earlier this summer at Millennium Park.

Without comment on its full, supposedly less than robust, financial picture, the City of Chicago is to be commended for all the superlative live music it provides for free--across many genres--especially as the glorious Millennium Park celebrates its 10th anniversary.

With the Chicago Jazz Festival coming up at the end of this month, on Monday the complimentary attraction was Broadway in Chicago's annual summer concert.

This can be a showcase for shows that are currently running in BIC theaters as well as upcoming ones, but the only "now playing in Chicago" musical represented in the 2014 iteration was Million Dollar Quartet, which has been running for years at the off-Loop Apollo Theater and not known to be under the BIC auspices. (It isn't listed on the Broadway in Chicago website.)

So it is to Broadway in Chicago's credit that their impressive pedigree--and the city's renown as a theater town--are able to bring in Broadway-caliber performers just to sing a song or two from shows that in some cases won't hit local venues for well over a year.

And that a capacity crowd of 11,000, plus supposedly a good bit of overflow, came out to hear them.

As a Broadway in Chicago subscriber, I was invited to avail myself of a prime pavilion seat without waiting in line, and took advantage of my proximity to take numerous photos (and some video) of each performance. As you'll see, the performers predominantly weren't in costume.

This isn't intended to be a review, in a critiquing sense, but merely a recap of what I saw and heard. (The performers listed in the captions are based on pre-show text upon the video screen, and may not be complete or precise.)

A pre-show dance-along performance to "On Your Feet" representing the forthcoming
pre-Broadway musical of the same name about Gloria & Emilio Estefan

A well-sung National Anthem by two award-winning high school students, Julia Lindsay Whitcomb and Jonah Rawitz

Million Dollar Quartet did a medley of songs by Elvis Presley, Johnny Cash, Carl Perkins and Jerry Lee Lewis. Performers included Marc Ededstein, Robby Kipferl, Kelly Lamont, Adam Lee, Lance Lipinski, Vance Okraszewski & Shaun Whitley

ABC-7 television personality Janet Davies was the concert's emcee and participated in a performance by
Kevin James (no, not that one) of The Illusionists: Witness the Impossible

From Evil Dead the Musical, coming soon to the Broadway Playhouse, Andrew di Rosa, Callie Johnson and David Sajewich
sang a fun song seemingly called "Candarian Demons"

Representing Pippin, which won the 2013 Tony Award for Best Musical Revival, were Ariana DeBose and Kyle Selig

Both with solid Broadway credits, Josh Young and Erin Mackey sounded strong on songs from the upcoming world premiere
of Amazing Grace, including the famous title tune. Young's was the most impressive voice of the night.

A new musical of Hansel and Gretel, coming to the Broadway Playhouse, seems to be aimed at kids, but
I was impressed by the song performed by Navi Afshar and Jack Ball, perhaps titled "Always Me and You"

The sun was shining on Monday night, but Adia Dant and her dog Macy--from Annie--assured that it would come out "Tomorrow"

Who crashed the musical theater party but none other than the leader of Twisted Sister, who has concocted
Dee Snider's Rock & Roll Christmas Tale. Dee himself previewed a mash-up of "We're Not Gonna Take It"
and famous Christmas Carols, as shown in the video below:

Apart from the above, Newsies is probably the most anticipated musical of my upcoming BIC subscription series.
Adam Kaplan did a nice job on a song from it, but a bit more representation might have been nice.

Before the show started, I happened to notice the woman above on the edge of the crowd and thought, "Wow, she's a beauty."
Turns out I was right in more than just leering opinion, as Hilary Maiberger, with Derick Pead, represented yet another touring production of Disney's Beauty and the Beast.

Following its Fall 2012 pre-Broadway tryout in Chicago en route to Broadway and a Best Musical Tony, Kinky Boots
will stop in Chicago next summer on its first national tour. Ellyn Marie Marsh was on-hand Monday night to sing a song.

A performance from Rodgers & Hammerstein's Cinderella by Paige Faure and Andy Jones ended in charming fashion.

Seems Chicago will never get enough of Jersey Boys, which will be back yet again. As Frankie Valli, John Michael Dias
belted out "My Eyes Adored You" and "Can't Take My Eyes Off of You"

Next spring, Chicago will get a pre-Broadway run of First Wives Club: the Musical, based on the movie and seemingly
featuring a score combining Motown classics and original songs. Becca Kaufman, Megan Murphy and Bethany Thomas
sounded good backed by the Monet Motifs Choir.

A surprise ending to Monday's concert came with two songs from Beautiful: The Carole King Musical, which will hit
Chicago in late 2015. Rebecca LaChance performed fine versions of "Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow" and "Beautiful."
I sat up close in the pavilion but took this from the lawn--which had already largely emptied--afterward,
as I never fail to marvel at Frank Gehry's Pritzker Pavilion, especially when bathed in light.

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

English (League Soccer) for Americans: Jordan and Paolo Tackle the EPL as the "Football" Season Gets Rolling

Contrary to the notice of numerous North Americans, soccer isn't only played once every four years, during the World Cup.

In fact, club soccer leagues comprised of privately-held teams have existed in England since 1888, over 40 years before the first World Cup (the most prestigious tournament within the realm of "International Soccer" played among countries, as opposed to "Club Soccer," primarily played among teams within a given country).

Almost every country you can think of around the world has its own league--or several, at different tiers of quality--of professional "football" teams. As common among U.S. baseball, basketball and hockey teams, club soccer teams aren't limited to players from their home country, and per a club's ability to attract players based on money, location, team prestige and other factors, rosters often include a mix of players from many nationalities.

Fans' fervor for their local or favorite soccer club(s) can be far more intense than even their passion for their country when playing in International tournaments. As a fan of hockey's Chicago Blackhawks I can relate to this, for I care more about their competing for the Stanley Cup than I do about U.S. Hockey in the Winter Olympics, especially as the latter--like the World Cup--happens only every 4 years.

Because of the continuity of club soccer teammates playing full seasons with each other--and perhaps also in competitions with teams from other countries--the quality of play for elite club teams can often be better than one may see in the World Cup.

In the United States, Major League Soccer (MLS) is the premier professional league, but the lower-level North American Soccer League (NASL) and United States Leagues also field teams in sizable cities.

World soccer league rankings by Dave Clark of SB Nation/Sounder at Heart
See story and data tables here.
Yet in terms of popularity within their home country, prestige around the world, ability to attract top tier players and the money involved--in terms of team value, player contracts & transfer fees, sponsorships, merchandising, etc.--the top club soccer leagues in England, Germany, Italy, Spain and elsewhere far outrank MLS, in that order per in-depth data compiled by one soccer blogger. (The International Federation of Football History and Statistics concurs on the top four leagues, but orders them Spain, England, Germany, Italy.)

The English Premier League, in which 20 teams compete each season, is the top league for soccer--or locally, football--in the United Kingdom, and among the most elite worldwide. With due deference to the top Spanish, Italian and German leagues, and other other leagues I know less about, the EPL is the world league of which I'm most aware. (Many of its games are now televised on major U.S. outlets.)

The table (i.e. standings) for Barclays Premier League (the EPL, Barclays Bank
is the sponsor) after one game of the 2014-15 season. From
But I am not nearly the avid fan or follower that my friends Jordan and Paolo are, so with the 2014-15 EPL season having begun this past weekend, I thought I would engage them in some analysis, as I did for the World Cup. (You can find those three articles on Seth Saith--1, 2, 3--but I've also set up a Futbol Fanatical blog to compile any soccer pieces, including this one).

As you'll see, I posed some questions that they responded to; Jordan provided his answers before the first EPL games were played last Saturday, and Paolo mostly provided a bit of color off of Jordan's responses on Sunday .

Thanks to both of them for their detailed insights.

As I explained to them in asking the questions, I am hoping this piece may be of interest avid fans of English soccer but perhaps just as much enlighten relative newbies to the EPL.

1. Is the English Premier League still the world's premier soccer league? If so, why?

Jordan: If you are asking if it is the best soccer league in the world you'd have to define what you mean by "best." Some people would say the Bundesliga (Germany) is best and some would say La Liga (Spain) is the best. Those two along with England would likely be the main three leagues that anyone would cite as the "premier" league for varying reasons. I think the Premier League is the most exciting.

Paolo: The EPL is probably the most watched and followed league in the world - helped in no great part in recent years by satellite TV deals that beam it across the globe, including the U.S. In terms of depth of competition I think that currently it is the top world league - and the game is played faster than in any other league. Both La Liga and the Bundesliga are the world's other top leagues (with Serie A in Italy a distant third) but all lack the overall global exposure of the EPL. 

A match between Manchester United and Real Madrid at Michigan Stadium
on August 2 drew 109,318 fans, the most ever for a soccer game in the U.S.
2. U.S. interest in soccer seems to be peaking, given ratings for the World Cup and attendance for games among European powers, such as the record-setting Manchester United-Real Madrid match at Michigan Stadium. But with the MLS and club soccer teams around the world that people in America may follow based on cultural or previous residential allegiance, why should the EPL demand the attention of "football" fans looking to build on their interest?

Jordan: I think the league is very exciting and interesting. For me I think part of the reason I follow the Premier League closer than other leagues is the fact that there is so much coverage of it and it is all in English and therefore easy to follow.

Paolo: Well frankly, for the U.S. neophyte, the attraction should be natural. The game is in our language, and despite some linguistic and cultural eccentricities, the spirit of the game is readily accessible to the U.S. fan. Americans are great sport fans, and as witnessed by this year's World Cup, they are beginning to understand the beauty and poetry of the world's game. 

3. Please clarify how and when EPL games will be televised in the U.S. I saw an ad saying all the games (in English) would be on NBC or NBCSN, but I saw the ad on ESPN-TV. Is ESPN or Fox still involved?

Jordan: All Premier League games are on some form of NBC. Usually that will mean NBCSN. Some games might be on NBC. Every game is available to watch live streaming and most are available to watch online throughout the week after the games have aired. No games will be on Fox or ESPN. Most games are on Saturday and Sunday mornings (United States central time) with occasional weeks having games on a Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday afternoon.

Paolo: Jordan explains the US broadcast perfectly. The games are all available in different configurations, but I was disappointed yesterday that only one game was available on free TV.

4. As we've discussed, although I'm not nearly the fan of the game itself that you are, I like the global majesty of the EPL and--sans the hooliganism--the football culture that pervades the U.K. (and most everywhere else). The one game I've been to in London, a Chelsea match with Paolo, was a lot of fun. 

But a couple aspects seem to be at odds with my American-ingrained sports fandom: 

a. The EPL itself seems to only have a "regular season" with the champion being the first-place team, not a tournament winner as in the American sports. The Brits--and you--seem perfectly fine with this. Help us philistines preferring a "knockout stage" better embrace this longstanding tradition. 

b. During any season, there seems to be a lot going on beyond each team trying to win the most EPL games. In any week, teams can not only be playing games against other EPL teams, but also clubs from lower English divisions (is this the FA Cup?) and from across Europe (if qualified for the Champions League or Europa League). During the same week, their players may play international matches for their country (i.e. England, Spain, Germany, etc.), which may be World Cup or Euro Cup qualifiers, but possibly just friendlies. Yet club teammates from opposing countries are expected to play hard against each other, even if injuries can be devastating to their club's prospects. Plus, a team's EPL rank determines Champions league qualification and also the possibility of Relegation.

Jordan: I have come to prefer no postseason. It is logical. The team that wins the most games is the winner. It's pretty simple. Playoffs are much too small a sample and random things are bound to happen that can cause the best team to not win. Following soccer has changed my thinking to the point that I can't get as excited as I used to about the World Series because to me the best team is the one with the best record at the end of the season. And don't even get me started on hockey where a team can sneak into the playoffs in 8th place or something then go on to win the championship. What's the point of playing the regular season? (Another advantage that soccer has is that everyone plays the exact same schedule.)
A photo from the one EPL game I've (Seth) attended, with Paolo.
Chelsea v. Wolverhampton at Stamford Bridge in late 2011

Paolo: The regular season championship - fairly standard across world football leagues - allows the entire season to be meaningful either by winning the league, qualifying for UEFA or Europa Cup slots, or avoiding relegation. U.S. style playoffs de-emphasize the best team record being declared the victor. There seems to be something not quite fair about that.

Jordan: But if you want tournaments, in England there are four of them that run concurrent with the season. The two English tournaments are the League Cup and the FA Cup and they are knock-out tournaments that every club from all levels throughout the country are entered in. (The Premier League clubs don't enter these tournaments until later rounds)

Then for the best teams there are the Europe-wide tournaments (maybe somewhat confusingly referred to as "leagues"), the Champions League and the Europa League (in order of prestige; teams play in one or the other). This "tournament running concurrent with the regular season" thing has often seemed to be the most difficult thing for non-fans to grasp.

All Champions League (and some domestic Cup matches) are played mid-week (meaning Tuesday or Wednesday). Europa League games are played on Thursdays. International qualifiers and friendlies recently changed the days on which they play. Now they are usually on Thursday/Friday and Monday/Tuesday.
The Champions League is actually a tournament of club teams
that qualify based on their season finish in the EPL and leagues
in several other European countries. Learn more here.
The number of teams from each country's top league that qualify for the Europa League and the Champions League is not set in stone. It depends on a lot of complicated calculations (UEFA's coefficients) designed to determine the relative strength of each league. The stronger the league the more spots they get in Europe. Right now England gets four Champions' League spots. The top three finishers in the Premier League automatically qualify right into the group stage. Whoever comes in fourth has to play a two-legged qualifier to get into the group stage. Arsenal came fourth last year so they will be playing mid-week games against Besiktas, a Turkish club, in the first two weeks of the season. 

Qualifying for Europe (especially the Europa League because the games are on Thursdays and many of the opponents can be in far Eastern or Northern Europe) can be detrimental to a team's home league campaign. One of the reasons Liverpool did so well last year was that they did not have to play in Europe so they had more time to practice and were also able to stay fresh. Many people expect Everton and Hull to struggle this season because they are in the Europa league. In recent years both Swansea and Newcastle were badly affected by their European exertions.

5. OK, let's look at the 2014-2015 EPL season itself. Action begins with a slate of games on Saturday, August 16. How many games do each of the 20 teams play in a season and when does it end?

Jordan: Each team plays every other team once at home and once away, so 38 games. The last day of the season is May 24th. 

6. Who do you expect to wind up on top, and why?

Jordan: I expect Chelsea to win because they spent a gabillion pounds, have one of the two best squads, and may be hungrier than Manchester City.

Paolo: Chelsea should win the league, challenged by Liverpool, Arsenal, Man City and Tottenham. Man U will suffer another terrible season. Overall Chelsea has the best squad, both balanced offensively and defensively. 

7. Who will the next 3 finishers (and thus, Champions League qualifiers) be?

Jordan: Manchester City, Arsenal, and....uh... tough one. I'll go with Manchester United partly because they don't have to play in Europe this season because they stunk to high heaven last season.

Paolo: Arsenal, Liverpool, and Man City (with Tottenham nipping at their heels). 

8. Who else has a good shot?

Jordan: Liverpool and Tottenham. Some people think Everton, and I am rooting for them, but I think they'll end up 7th. (I must note that Ross Barkley just injured his knee and could be out 6-8 weeks. That will seriously harm Everton.) 

9. Which trio of teams are likely to finish at the bottom and be relegated?

Jordan: Burnley, West Brom, and.... again, tough call. A bunch of teams could be down there. Likely candidates for me are Hull City, Aston Villa, Crystal Palace, and Leicester City.

Paolo: Crystal Palace, Hull City and West Bromley. 

See Wikipedia for more information.
10. Who might surprise, one way or the other?

Jordan: I was going to go with Crystal Palace but their manager just got canned so now I think they'll be battling relegation. I don't have any predictions for surprises. If Tottenham finish fourth (or above) that would be a big surprise. Their new coach is well respected and it will be really interesting to see if he can get a club used to disappointment to the next level. I expect a lot of congestion in the bottom half of the table.

I don't know if Stoke will exactly surprise but they are in the process of changing their style from a big, bruising, physical team to a much more skilled and attractive to watch team.  

11. If not previously chronicled, please discuss Manchester United and how they look this year. They're coming off a very subpar season, finishing 7th in the EPL, and replaced their Manager (head coach). What's going on?

Jordan: They look decent so far. Their new manager, Louis Van Gaal, is a real piece of work and should be very entertaining. He has a lot of experience as well, having previously managed Barcelona, Bayern Munich, and Ajax.

He has already made tons of changes, including to going to a 3-5-2 formation (3 defenders, 5 midfielders (two of which are wingbacks), and 2 forwards) which looks like it is putting Rooney and Mata in their ideal positions. They still need to strengthen the defense. They are lacking in quality and experience there.

Paolo: Simply, they need more defense, and didn't really strengthen. 

12. Name some great players to follow, including any notable Americans. I think Tim Howard is still the starting goalie for Everton, right?

Alexis Sanchez
Jordan: The flashiest new player to the league is Alexis Sanchez on Arsenal. He starred for Chile in the World Cup and has been on Barcelona the last few years. He's very good. My only problem with him is that he often does this with his shorts and I have no idea why, but I do know that I don't care for it. (see nearby photo)

I'm not even sure where to start with players to follow. I guess if you're talking about players exciting to watch and/or who will score goals here are a few: Sergio Aguero (Manchester City), Daniel Sturridge, Raheem Sterling, Phillipe Coutinho (Liverpool), Eric Lamela, Christian Eriksen (Tottenham), Diego Costa, Eden Hazard, Oscar, Willian (Chelsea), Ross Barkley, Romelu Lukaku (Everton), Marko Arnautovic, Bojan Krkic (Stoke City), Wilifried Bony, Gylfi Siggurdson (Swansea City), Juan Mata, Wayne Rooney (Manchester United), Loic Remy, Junior Hoilett (QPR), Siem DeJong, Remy Cabella (Newcastle)

There aren't many Americans, I don't think. Jozy Altidore is on Sunderland but it's safe to say his career is not on the upswing. Goalkeeper Tim Howard on Everton was great last season (and in the World Cup). Goalkeeper Brad Guzan was Aston Villa's player of the year last season. He was really good but it should tell you something when a team's player of the year is a keeper. Geoff Cameron is a defender/midfielder on Stoke and was good last year but it's not clear if he has lost his starting spot to new signing Phil Bardsley. 

Yaya Toure
13. Best guesses for the EPL's Player of the Season and Golden Boot (top scorer). (Last season, Luis Suarez won both while playing for Liverpool, but he's now with Barcelona in Spain's La Liga.)

Jordan: If Yaya Toure can come close to what he did last season he will be player of the year. Otherwise probably someone from one of the big clubs. Maybe Wayne Rooney or Vincent Kompany.

Golden Boot: Edin Dzeko (Manchester City), Aguero (but he probably can't stay healthy), Olivier Giroud (Arsenal), Sturridge

Paolo: Player of the year? Alexis Sanchez or Kompany.
14. Tell me about some interesting or potentially intriguing storylines involving teams, players, managers, owners, etc.
Jordan: The top seven teams look pretty well set, and the top three are pretty much agreed on as well. Some order of Chelsea, Manchester City, and Arsenal followed by Liverpool, Manchester United, Tottenham, and Everton. The battle for fourth place will be intense. 8th is a place where Newcastle often ends up but they have made a number of changes and some people think they are weaker than last year. I think Newcastle and Stoke are most likely for 8th/9th. After that is almost a complete free for all. Any one of the other teams could just about finish anywhere.

Jose Mourinho, Chelsea manager
Man U's new manager Van Gaal is going to say all kinds of interesting things and between him and Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho (who can also be referred to as "The Devil") they are going to cause all kinds of mischief. Though the two supposedly get along well Mourinho has already started trying to cause trouble by making derogatory comments about Manchester United's signing of Luke Shaw. Van Gaal didn't rise to the bait.

I shouldn't let Mourinho get to me but I am often unsuccessful in my attempts to ignore him. My standard description of him is that he is a disingenuous jackass who brings the game into disrepute basically every time he opens his mouth. As I'm writing this I just read some more garbage that he said today which I won't even dignify with a response. He's a bad person.

Southampton was fantastic last season but they have been stripped of their manager (Mauricio Pochettino, who is now at Tottenham) and many of their best players, most of whom went to Liverpool. Southampton is known for having a great youth academy but it is likely they are going to struggle this season.

Hull City (or Hull Tigers, depending who you ask) were promoted last year and amazingly qualified for the Europa League by virtue of making it to the FA Cup final. I expect that the extra competition will stretch their squad and if they don't get relegated I wouldn't be surprised if they barely survive. Last season the owner, Assem Allam, didn't get support for additions he wanted to make around the stadium so he said he wanted to change the name of the club from "Hull City" to "Hull Tigers" to generate more revenue (don't ask me how a name change would do that). (They have long been known by the nickname of "Hull City Tigers" but taking out the "City" and formally changing the name was a huge deal and many of their supporters freaked out. That sort of thing is just not done over there. Last year the owner of Cardiff City changed the team's home shirt color from blue to red and people went nutso over that) Allam, who is a businessman who has lived in Hull since the 60's (as opposed to being a absentee/distant foreign owner) did all manner of deceitful things in order to effect the name change. I think as it stands now they are technically "Hull Tigers" but don't know how permanent it is. People are still fuming.

Old Trafford, home of Manchester United
Aston Villa has traditionally been one of the biggest clubs in England but have fallen on hard times and barely stayed up last year. The manager, Celtic legend Paul Lambert, did well in his previous job at Norwich but has been struggling at Villa. He has brought in the notorious red-ass Roy Keane (who is also currently the assistant coach of the Ireland national team) as an assistant to try to fix things. We'll see what happens. It seems like a volatile situation.

Manchester City has extended the contracts of Aguero, Silva, and Kompany but has just announced they are not extending Yaya Toure's contract. This could prove troublesome as Toure has some history of being a little, shall we say, sensitive. Right after last season ended he expressed his displeasure about the club's substandard happy birthday wishes and threatened to leave.

The manager of Crystal Palace quit two days before the season started because he wanted more control. What looked like a team with a chance at finishing around 10th place is now likely looking at a much worse finish.

15. How might a new-to-the-EPL fan choose a team to root for, and how should they follow them?

Jordan: I have no idea how to pick a club. I still don't even have one club I root for. It is all relative and can depend on all kinds of things, from the manager to the players. The only constant is that I always root against Chelsea no matter what.

Following a club is easy nowadays. I used to not be able to see any games and followed via a once a month magazine from England. Twelve years ago my local ABC affiliate did not show the World Cup final; instead they showed the farm report. Eleven years ago I had to drive over 100 miles (and pay $20) to see the UEFA Cup (now called Europa League) final. Now soccer is all over the TV and internet. 

Paolo: Unlike Jordan I'd say root for Chelsea. Seriously, unless you are Manchester-centric, pick a London club to root for. You'll find more overall coverage for these clubs. 

16. I like following match results and standings on the FotMob app that Jordan introduced me to. There's also a website and ESPN has great coverage on Another good site (and related app) is Anything else you recommend?

Men in Blazers, formerly of ESPN, now on NBC and NBCSN
Jordan: I don't use many apps but I do listen to multiple podcasts throughout the week. My favorites, Men In Blazers, just got signed away from ESPN by NBC. I think they will be having a show on NBCSN.

For up to the minute news I often listen to Talksport Radio via the TuneIn app.  

17. If a newly devoted American soccer fan travels to England and wants to see a match, where should they?

Jordan: No idea. Never been there. But I guess if you went to London you'd have several choices. Selhurst Park (where Crystal Palace plays) looks awesome to me. And they sing "Glad All Over" before every match. 

Selhurst Park, south of London, home to Crystal Palace
18. Anything else you would like to add about the new EPL season?

Jordan: Nah. I'm running out of time. The season starts soon and I have to get my fantasy team in order.

The one thing I haven't mentioned yet is that a lot of my predictions could change to some degree depending on what happens in the next few weeks. I don't like the way it works but teams are allowed to continue to buy and sell players until two weeks after the season has begun. The deadline is August 31st. After that date teams have to stick with what they have until January when there is another window for them to acquire players. There are still a lot of rumors that Manchester United is going to add some big-name players. 

19. What other global soccer leagues do you follow closely?

Jordan: Serie A and La Liga.

Paolo: I'd add the Bundesliga to Jordan's list. I also personally follow a bunch of Central and South American leagues (all in countries I lived in). 

20. When should I check back about the Champions League getting hot & heavy or anything else major in the soccer year?

EPL play began on Saturday, August 16. Among the surprising results
were league newcomer Leicester City tying Everton 2-2 (shown above)
and Manchester United losing to Swansea City 2-1.
Jordan: I don't know the dates yet. In a few weeks they will know all the teams that made it into the final 32 and will have a draw to split them into 8 groups of 4 teams. The group stage will probably start in September or October and it is run sort of like the World Cup. Each team plays each of the other 3 teams in their group but in this tournament they play two games against each team, one home and one away. The top two teams from each group advance. Once they get down to the last 16 teams they have a draw and it is a knockout tournament from there with each round except for the final being two games where each team plays one at home and one away. 

Thank you very much for taking the time to provide some great insight and opinions. Enjoy the season.

Jordan: That's what I'm here for. You, too.

Paolo: Jordan covers things very well, I'm just adding color. :-)