However, I like to think that composer Cy Coleman embodies the spirit of my missing composing ability. He is an artist who is able to craft beautiful and lasting melodies that stand well on their own but fit well in their original contexts, too.

And, make no mistake, City of Angels is no deviation from this school.

However, I also believe that it is the lyrics which have to be strongest in order for a show to be good (otherwise, only the overture lives on, such as the case of Leonard Bernstein's "Candide") and that is not the case in "City of Angels." David Zippel is a putz. He seems to follow no particular school but is own, which seems to be, "Hey let's make the songs as raunchy and as schmaltzy as possible!" and his lyrics lack any sense of poetry or style. Mr. Zippel may be a lyricist, but he is not an artist.

And, as long as I'm on the topic of art, librettist Larry Gelbart doesn't know what he's doing either. I know what he's trying to do, which is transcend the "non-artist" label that he's acquired by writing television comedy for so many years (as Neil Simon did), but he doesn't do it. Yes, there are moments in "Angels" that I would consider "funny," but nothing "worth laughing at."

So, when you put this together with the consideration that the thing that makes a musical different from opera (or other artforms, for that matter) is that the words are THE MOST IMPORTANT THING and the music is secondary, we can safely call "City of Angels" a bad musical.

That's not to say that musicals shouldn't have good music--they're MUSICAL, for crying out loud! Indeed, that's what separates a good musical from a GREAT musical. So let's say we replaced David Zippel with Sheldon Harnick or Fred Ebb and Larry Gelbart with (say) Neil Simon, then the possibility of "City of Angels" being a great musical is greatly increased.

The moral of this story: When you have soemone like Cy Coleman on the team, don't waste him!