My Review of the Stage Musical -- Romance

This post is the third in a series, following:

1) My Review of the Stage Musical -- General

2) My Review of the Stage Musical -- Race

=======

In this post I will write about a series of romantic relationships, in which the movie and stage musical differ.

1) Billy Kostecki and Elizabeth

2) Jake and Marjorie Houseman

3) Neil Kellerman and Baby Houseman

4) Johnny Castle and Baby Houseman

Other relationships -- involving Lisa Houseman, Penny Johnson, Robbie Gould, Lisa Houseman and Vivian Pressman -- are essentially similar in the movie and musical.

======

Billy Kostecki and Elizabeth

In my previous article about the musical's race aspect, I pointed out that Billy frequently sings with a Negro female co-worker. I perceived that he looks at her longingly, but I did not notice his saying anything romantic to her. According to the musical's program, the character is called Elizabeth.

In an earlier post titled The Resort Hotel's Employees, I reported -- based on Eleanor Bergstein's commentary in a DVD -- that the an early draft of the movie's story was supposed to include a scene showing that Negroes were allowed to use the resort's swimming pool along with Caucasians.

When the producers were selecting a resort as a location for the movie, they looked for a resort with a swimming pool, because the movie was supposed to show that the swimming pool was racially integrated. The author Eleanor Bergstein in her running commentary mentioned that the Jewish-owned resorts racially integrated their swimming pools before the other resorts did so, so apparently her original script included a reference to that fact.

However, the producers could not find an available resort with a swimming pool (we do see guests swimming in a lake). Therefore none of the movie’s dialogue refers to the racial integration of the swimming pool, although the dialogue refers several times to the Civil Rights movement that was developing in the South in the early 1960s. We can suppose that the African-Americans in the planned swimming-pool scene would have been the orchestra members, who were idle during the days.

Based on the stage musical, I now speculate further that the swimming pool scene was supposed to introduce a subplot about a romantic relationship between Caucasian Billy and Negro Elizabeth.

(In 1963 the polite words were Caucasian and Negro, and so I use them here.)

If there was some relationship between Billy and Elizabeth, then perhaps Elizabeth was involved somehow in Billy helping Penny getting an abortion. Below is my list of speculations.

* Elizabeth told Billy about the abortionist in New Paltz.

* Elizabeth herself or a close relative or friend had had an abortion.

* Elizabeth remarked that Negroes were disadvantaged in getting legal abortions.

* Elizabeth helped cover for Billy or Penny while they were gone from work for an entire day.

The Billy-Elizabeth subplot was eliminated, however, as clutter around the time that the producers failed to find a resort with a swimming pool.

Years later, when Bergstein had the opportunity to retell her story as a musical, she restored Elizabeth into the story. Elizabeth sings with Billy, and he seems to be attracted to her, but their relationship is not elaborated further in the musical.

=======

Jake and Marjorie Houseman

Marjorie Houseman is much more prominent in the musical than in the movie.

They have a long conversation while they are playing golf. Unfortunately, I did not grasp that conversation's essence. I perceived that there was some tension between them. They seemed to be making biting remarks at each other.

(I did not take notes or record sound while I was watching the musical. I do not have access to the musical's script. Although the musical's sound system was superb, my hearing is becoming worse, and I could not understand every word. My account of the dialogue is based only on my memory and might be mistaken in some details.)

My perception might be based on the ABC original movie, in which they are approaching a divorce.

After Penny recovers from her abortion in the musical, she is so grateful to the entire Houseman family that she takes the initiative to give private dance lessons to Marjorie. During such a lesson, Penny mentions that Jake had treated her after her an abortion. Penny assumes that Marjorie knew about this, but Marjorie knew nothing until Penny mentioned it.

Marjorie is angry that Jake has kept this secret from her, and so she goes and confronts Jake about it.

Afterwards Marjorie confronts Baby. This scene in the musical is similar to a scene that was filmed for the movie but was deleted (8:17 to 9:02 in the following video).

In both the movie and the musical, Marjorie insinuates that Baby's actions have been wrecking the Houseman family. This insinuation makes much more sense when we understand that Marjorie fears that her marriage might be breaking apart.

Since all the marriage problems have been removed from the movie, Marjorie's insinuation is puzzling. How exactly has Baby been "wrecking everyone else's lives"? As far as the movie audience can see, Baby has only disappointed her father by lying to him about the borrowed money. Even in regard to Jake, Baby has not wrecked anything.

In the musical, however, Baby has caused a serious argument between Marjorie and Baby, because Penny unwittingly revealed to Marjorie the secret of Jake's involvement in the abortion. Since Marjorie and Jake have been having marriage problems, this revelation might be the straw that breaks the camel's back of the marriage. In that regard, Baby might have wrecked her parents' marriage.

The scene deleted from the movie was a superb, and it was acted superbly by the actress Kelly Bishop, who played the character Marjorie. Since the marriage problems had been eliminated from the movie, however, Marjorie's insinuation that Baby was wrecking everyone else's lives no longer made sense. That might be why this superb scene was deleted.

The marriage trouble between Jake and Marjorie was removed from the movie but later was restored to the stage musical and to the ABC original movie.

=======

Neil Kellerman and Baby Houseman

During last September and October I wrote a series of articles called Baby Houseman's Inner Conflict about Femininity. In that series' sixth part, I re-evaluated the relationship between Baby and Neil:

In the first part of Dirty Dancing, the relationship between Baby Houseman and Neil Kellerman is friendly, even affectionate.

In the movie's last part, Neil becomes a rather negative character. Therefore, people who have watched the entire movie develop a false memory that he was a negative character in the first part too. People persist in this mistake even as they watch the movie many times.

Early in the movie, Baby and Neil dance and chat together in the ballroom. A couple days ago, I re-watched that scene three times, looking for indications that Baby felt uncomfortable with Neil. I was surprised to find that she obviously is enjoying her time with him in the ballroom. This realization has caused me to reconsider Baby's and Neil's relationship.

Now I recognize that Baby was using Neil as her practice boyfriend, also known as a starter boyfriend, without his knowing his status.

[....]

Baby decided to use Neil as a practice boyfriend because she is not sure how to be feminine naturally. She wants to see how an interested man talks and acts with her, and she wants to experiment with her responses. For her, this is fun, and she is happy to remain in an elementary flirting stage for a long time.

She strings Neil along slowly. As the week passes, she gradually allows him more freedom to kiss and embrace her. Eventually she even allows him to touch a breast briefly through her clothes during a night's final embrace.

Baby likes Neil as a friend. He has many admirable qualities. After Neil and Johnny argue about the pachanga dance, she advises Johnny to discuss the issue with Neil again. She knows that Neil is a reasonable and accommodating person.

Baby thinks that Neil learned useful lessons about female-male interactions from herself too. She expects that he eventually will become a good husband for some other woman.

That interpretation of mine has been confirmed by my watching the stage musical. In particular, the musical includes an important conversation among Baby, Neil and Johnny in the scene right after the "Love Is Strange" dance. Neil enters the dance room and begins talking about the talent show, the pechanga, and so forth.

During this conversation, they talk about politics. Baby admires Neil for his political activism, for his intention to travel to Mississippi to help promote civil rights for Negroes. Johnny scoffs, saying that he himself never has voted even once in his life. Baby is appalled by Johnny's lack of even interest.

Then, however, Neil reveals that he will not travel to Mississippi after all, because he as a manager should not be gone from the hotel for a couple of weeks. Now Baby is somewhat disappointed with Neil for subordinating his political activism to his professional career.

This conversation is important in the story, because it gives Baby a reason to shift her romantic affection from Neil completely to Johnny. Although Johnny is not interested in politics, Neil's interest is more talk than action.

In general, I perceived throughout the musical scattered indications that Baby was affectionate and respectful toward Neil. These indications are related to the scattered mentions that Neil intends to travel to Mississippi.

In contrast, the movie mentions Neil's intention only once, when Neil and Baby are dancing in the ballroom during her first night at the resort. In that single context, the mention seems to be merely an empty boast to impress idealistic Baby.

The musical's continuing mentions of Neil's intended Mississippi trip support Baby's affection and admiration toward Neil during the story. Her disappointment in him occurs near the story's end and occurs suddenly.

======

Johnny Castle and Baby Houseman

In the stage musical that I saw, Baby dances more poorly and improves more slowly than in the movie.

The musical's program reports that the actress, Kaleigh Courts, has attended the Houston Ballet Academy and has performed as a member of the Houston Ballet, so the actress can dance superbly. She purposely dances poorly in the musical.

She continues to dance poorly through the "Hungry Eyes" and  "Hey, Baby" scenes. Only when she accomplishes the lift move in the lake does she seem to show improvement. Her dancing at the Sheldrake is likewise worse in the musical than in the movie. Her dancing during and after the "Love Is Strange" scene is about the same in the musical as in the movie.

Johnny's apparent affection for Baby corresponds to her dancing skill. In other words, his affection develops slower in the musical than in the movie. I didn't notice this difference in any dialogue. Rather, his coolness -- his iciness -- toward her is indicated by his body movements and voice tone.

Maybe other actors playing Johnny and Baby in other companies play their relationship differently. Maybe other actresses playing Baby dance better and maybe other actors playing Johnny speak more warmly. For the purpose of my article here, I must assume that the performance that I happened to see is the Baby-Johnny relationship that the stage musical is supposed to portray.

In the musical, the relationship develops more slowly, and so their decision to becomes sexual is more sudden and seems to be prompted by their mutual experience of seeing Penny in mortal danger after her abortion.

In the movie, they became gradually more affectionate while they are practicing for their Sheldrake performance. In the musical, they become suddenly more affection after they have become sexual, which they have done because they were upset about Penny.

Even after Baby has become sexual with Johnny, she still feels affectionate towards Neil. Only after Neil reveals that he will not travel to Mississippi after all, does Baby shift all her romantic attention to Johnny.

======

I think that the musical's portrayal of the relationship among Baby, Neil and Johnny is closer to Bergstein's original concept than the movie is.

In the movie, Neil seems to be merely a tiresome creep, and so it is obvious that Baby should disdain him and prefer the exciting artist Johnny. Furthermore, the movie's Jewish subtext suggests that Baby feels pressured by her family to marry a Jewish man, like Neil.

In the musical, Baby continually admires Neil because of his political activism, which is symbolized continually by his intention to travel to Mississippi. In contrast, Baby is appalled that Johnny is so politically uninterested that he has never even voted. Therefore, Baby's dilemma about whether to select Neil or Johnny as her ultimate romantic interest is more conflicted. Her dilemma is resolved only when Neil reveals that he will not travel to Mississippi after all.

The removal of most of the racial aspect from the movie prevented the movie audience from understanding why Baby might admire Neil. The movie audience perceived Neil to be merely a tiresome creep.

The character Neil was played brilliantly as a tiresome creep by the actor Lonny Price, who furthermore is a rather short man. Perhaps the character Neil turned out to be more despised by the movie audience than Bergstein intended because of the decision to cast Price in the role and because of Price's brilliant performance of the role.

If my speculation that the musical's portrayal of the Baby-Neil-Johnny triangle is closer than the movie to Bergstein's original concept, then I judge her original concept to be the better story. In the musical, Baby is more conflicted about whether she should pursue a romantic relationship with a man like Neil or a man like Johnny.

=======

Most people love the movie Dirty Dancing so much that they reject reflexively other presentations of the story. This rejection happened especially in regard to the ABC original movie. (I have published two posts praising the ABC version and intend to publish two more.)

However, the movie is somewhat different from Bergstein's original story. The movie was addressed to an audience in the 1980s and had to be kept to a standard length and had to kept rather simple. Therefore, much of Bergstein's story was not included in the movie.

The other presentations -- the stage musical and the ABC original movie -- were for audiences in the 21st century. Those audiences are already very familiar with the movie's story and they live in a more multi-ethnic society. The story can be told more briskly, making time for the racial aspect and the Housemans' marriage trouble to be restored into Bergstein's story. The later presentations are closer than the movie to Bergstein's original concept of the story.

The stage musical has provided new insights into the roles of Billy, Jake, Marjorie, Neil and Johnny -- and therefore into the role of Baby.

=======

This series will continue:

4) My Review of the Stage Musical -- Comparison of Songs

I think she gets it from me!

While Marjorie and Jake Houseman are watching Baby Houseman and Johnny Castle doing their final dance, Marjorie remarks to Jake:

I think she gets it from me!

In the following video clip, Marjorie's remark occurs at 1:20.

Marjorie seems to imply that Baby inherited her apparent dancing talent from Marjorie. The movie audience has not seen, however, any evidence that Marjorie herself has any dancing talent. Marjorie has been seen in four dancing situations:

-----

1) Marjorie is participating in a class for beginning dancers conducted by Penny Johnson.

The Houseman family taking a class for beginning dancers.

-----

2) During their first evening at the resort, Marjorie and Jake are dancing to orchestra music. Marjorie's dancing is not remarkable.

Marjorie's unremarkable dancing with Jake in the ballroom

-----

3) During a later evening, some guests are dancing in the gazebo. Marjorie and Jake are not dancing, because they are waiting for an "a waltz" -- a simple and slow dance.

Marjorie: "We're waiting for a waltz"

-----

4) On the last evening, after Baby and Johnny have performed their dance, Marjorie is seen dancing with Neil Kellerman. Marjorie's dancing is a simple boogie -- not remarkable.

Marjorie boogie-dancing with Neil

======

Marjorie's remark makes a bad impression that she is ditzy and vain. At that point she has seen Baby performing her dance for only one minute, but that short time has sufficed to see that Baby is performing rather well. Marjorie's apparent conclusion that Baby's performance is due to Marjorie herself seems absurd.

It's possible that Eleanor Bergstein intended to make Marjorie look ditzy and vain. The Houseman family seems to comprise two contrasting groups:

1) Lisa and Marjorie are ditzy and vain.

2) Baby and Jake are thoughtful and modest.

However, Marjorie's remark is said during the movie's happy ending. I think that Bergstein intended the remark to make a better impression about Marjorie, but Bergstein's intention went awry.

======

Important context for Marjorie's remark was deleted from the movie. A few hours before the talent show, Marjorie and Baby had a serious conversation in which Marjorie compared herself to Baby. The conversation was filmed, but the scene was deleted when the film was edited. In the following video, the deleted conversation can be seen between 8:17 and 9:02.

Baby Houseman
Ma, please, you don't understand.

Marjorie Houseman
No, Baby, you don't.

I know about this. I really know.

When I was your age, I was in love with someone else before your father. And when it ended, it hurt so bad I thought I'd die of it, but I didn't.

And I didn't wreck everyone else's lives in the process either.

Here, Marjorie compares her own seventeen-year-old self with seventeen-year-old Baby. Marjorie too suffered a painful break-up with a boyfriend.

Marjorie's remark she she didn't wreck everyone else's lives either is ambiguous. This remark might mean

* Marjorie did not wreck lives, but Baby is doing so.

... or else it might mean ...

* Marjorie did not wreck lives, and Baby likewise is not wrecking lives.

I think that the second meaning is the correct interpretation. Marjorie is reassuring Baby that Baby will get through this personal crisis and that the Houseman family too will survive this family crisis. However, Marjorie also is suggesting to Baby that Baby's crisis is affecting -- albeit not wrecking -- the family.

Marjorie is helping Baby to understand her crisis with a proper perspective.

=====

My key point here is that in this deleted scene Marjorie compared herself to Baby. Although the scene has been deleted, we should use it as important context for Marjorie's remark, just a few hours later, that I think she gets it from me!

In that sentence, Marjorie's word it does not refer mainly to Baby's dance skill, but rather to Baby's emotional strength.

Marjorie and Jake both are aware that Baby is suffering from her breakup with Johnny. Although Johnny has disrupted the talent show and has taken Baby up onto the stage, the breakup continues.

Johnny's speech gives Marjorie and Jake a new perspective on Baby's recent actions. Baby has not been "wrecking everyone else's lives". Rather, Baby has been standing up for other people and has been teaching Johnny to be a better person.

Then, despite the emotional pain that Baby has suffered -- and still is suffering -- from her breakup, Baby focuses on dancing well and keeps a smile on her face. Baby makes the whole Houseman family proud of her.

Baby privately has stood up for and taught other people, and now she publicly is displaying grit and courage. In that regard, Marjorie sees her own young self in Baby and feels proud that she has raised Baby to become such an admirable young adult.

That is why Marjorie -- a mother proud of her daughter -- exclaims I think she gets it from me!

My Speculations About the Talent Show in the Original Script

In order to convince Patrick Swayze to play the role of Johnny Castle in Dirty Dancing, the producers granted Swayze great authority in changing the script. By 1986, when the movie was filmed, he had played major roles in about a dozen movies. (His first major role was in Skatetown USA in 1979). He also had taken acting lessons for many years and had seriously thought about all of his movies and roles.

Although Patrick's wife Lisa never became a star, she too studied acting, and she helped Patrick analyze all his roles. Patrick and Lisa deserve much more credit than they have received for improving the script of Dirty Dancing.

In his autobiography The Time of My Life, he describes (page 130) the original script as follows:

I read the script for Dirty Dancing one evening in our new house. Right away it filled me with emotion -- but not the kind it was supposed to. I didn't like it. It seemed fluffy -- nothing more than a summer-camp movie. Lisa read it, too, and she felt the same way.

Further, he tells (pages 136-137) how he rewrote the last scene.

Lisa and I stayed up the entire night before filming the final scene, where Johnny [Castle] grabs the microphone in front of everyone at the resort, so we could rewrite the big speech. Sometimes we'd be working on new dialogue right up to shooting -- and then continue fixing it between takes. We never stopped trying to make it better.

I felt all along that Johnny should ultimately end up with Penny [Johnson], as they were so much alike and a more realistic couple than Johnny and Baby [Houseman]. That change got overruled, which was probably for the best. ...

We [Patrick and Lisa] did a lot of rewriting of the big final scene, but one line that I absolutely hated ended up staying in. I could hardly even bring myself to say, "Nobody puts Baby in a corner" in front of the cameras, it just sounded so corny. But later, seeing the finished film, I had to admit it worked. ...

The more we added and revised, the stronger the characters got.

The reason why Patrick and Lisa Swayze stay up all night "rewriting" Johnny's speech is that (I speculate) Eleanor Bergstein's original script did not have any such speech at all.

Swayze's book suggests that Bergstein's original script did include Johnny's statement Nobody puts Baby is the corner. However, I speculate that the statement was added during a last-day argument about the drastic change of the final scene. The argument was settled with a compromise that the scene would include the speech written by Patrick and Lisa during the preceding night on the condition that the scene include also the corner statement that likewise was added during the last-day argument.

=====

The song that originally accompanied Baby's and Johnny's triumphant dance was not The Time of My Life. Rather, the song was an unidentified song composed by Lionel Richie. In a previous article, I argued that the song was Richie's Dancing on the Ceiling.

The fact that the song was changed was revealed in an interview of Frank Previte, who wrote The Time of My Life.

When I [Previte] met Patrick at the Oscars [in 1988], he told me:

"You have no idea what this song ["The Time of My Life"] did for this movie. We filmed the movie out of sequence so the last scene was the first one filmed. We listened to 149 songs and hated them. We rehearsed every day to a Lionel Richie track. Good song but it wasn’t our song. We all felt the ending wasn’t happening and the movie was going to bomb."

"Then your cassette with you and Rachele Cappelli singing 'Time of My Life' came in. We filmed to that, and at the end of the day we all looked at each other and said "Wow, what just happened? This ending is awesome! Let’s go make this movie!"

It changed everything for them for the better. The camaraderie that wasn’t there was now there. 

The above quote indicates to me the following considerations:

* As written in the screenplay, the final scene caused much dissatisfaction and dissension among top people making the movie.

* The final filming of that scene was postponed for a considerable time while various decisions and changes were made.

* After the scene was changed, the top people shared a consensus that the scene was dramatically better.

I am sure that Eleanor Bergstein herself agreed happily that the change improved her movie. She deserves praise for going along with her collaborators' constructive criticism. The result is that her movie is brilliant.

Nobody should think that I am trying to tarnish Bergstein's glory. Rather, I am trying merely to deduce the final scene that had existed before the collaborative improvements to which she agreed.

======

In the above excerpt from Swayze's autobiography, the paragraph saying that Johnny should ultimately end up with Penny is sandwiched between 1) a paragraph saying that the Swayzes rewrote the big speech and 2) a paragraph about the Baby in the corner statement. This context indicates to me that Swayze argued that the final scene should include a revelation that Johnny would end up with Penny.

Swayze's argument about the Johnny-and-Penny ending surely boggles the minds of the movie's fans. However, when Swayze was making that argument, the story's ending was less about Baby's love for Johnny and more about Baby's rivalry with her sister Lisa.

As long as Baby outperformed Lisa in the talent show, Baby should be satisfied to relinquish Johnny to Penny, who was his better match. That was the essence of Swayze's argument, which was reasonable when the story still was mostly about the Baby-Lisa rivalry.

Keep in mind that Bergstein's original script had been rejected by all the major producers. It was rejected not because all the producers were stupid, but rather because the script "seemed fluffy" -- was different from the later, rewritten, final script.

Think about that before you scoff at me for speculating that the original story was mostly about the rivalry between Baby and Lisa. The movie ended with Baby outperforming Lisa in the talent show.

Baby triumphed over Lisa by sexually seducing professional-dancer Johnny so that he would help her organize a spectacular performance in the talent show.

======

Based on my speculation, I hypothesize this story.

The movie begins with the Baby-Lisa rivalry. Baby reads economics textbooks and wants to pursue a career. Lisa reads women's magazines, frets about her personal appearance and wants to marry a medical student.

On the Houseman family's first day at the resort, while they still are unloading their car, Billy Kostecki appears and offers Baby a job. She can earn some money by working secretly as the magician's stooge. Baby agrees. Because she will be a focus of attention during the magic show, she wants to look sexy, so she tightens her bra straps to lift her breasts.

Billy has told Baby to go to the resort's main building at the time when the Entertainment Staff will arrive. There she will meet the magician, who will instruct her how to act as his stooge in his magic tricks. When Baby arrives at the main building's back door, she sees Max Kellerman lecturing his waiters about flattering the guests' teenage daughters, and she sees the Entertainment Staff arrive, led by Johnny.

Baby learns from the magician how to help do the magic tricks, and subsequently she acts as the stooge in the magic show later that evening.

Later, when Baby wanted $250 for Penny's abortion, she perhaps tried to get the money from the magician and/or Neil Kellerman. These conversations might have introduced the idea of Baby participating in a spectacular magic show on the last night. Maybe the show's best performance would win a $250 prize.

While Baby is learning to dance with Johnny for the Sheldrake performance, she starts to think how she could incorporate her new dance skills into the last-night magic show. Baby's dance performance at the talent show will be far better than Lisa's dopey singing of the song I'm So Pretty.

However, Baby foresees that Johnny will have little interest in herself after Penny recovers from her abortion.

Therefore, Baby schemes to seduce Johnny right after the Sheldrake performance. Baby threatens Lisa to prevent Lisa from informing their parents about Baby's absent all night. On the drive to and from the Sheldrake, Baby bares her breasts to Johnny in the car. Finally, Baby does to Johnny's cabin and accomplishes her seduction.

To continue enjoying sex with Baby, Johnny continues to spend time with her and helps her practice and perform her talent-show dance. Together, Baby and Johnny begin to develop the talent-show performance. Scenes of their practice sessions are accompanied partially by Swayze's song "She's Like the Wind", because Baby flies through the air in her fearful, clumsy attempts to master the lift movement.

The planned performance gradually takes shape. Baby will be sawed in half by the magician. Then there will be some magic trick involving the ceiling. Then Johnny will come onto the stage and will rejoin the magician's sawed-in-half box. Then Baby will emerge with her whole body from the box, and she and Johnny will perform their dance.

Baby's and Johnny's practice sessions are shown in the movie. Also shown are Johnny's teaching the hotel staff Cuban-soul dances. There are lots of dance scenes.

However, during the final days before the talent show, Johnny squabbles with Neil and is falsely accused of stealing money from Moe Pressman, and so Johnny is fired. As Johnny says goodbye to Baby, he jokes, Maybe they'll saw you in seven pieces now in order to fill all the time in her truncated talent-show performance.

Baby is disappointed, because all her efforts for the talent show have turned out to be inconsequential. By default, Lisa will shine as the family's star performer with her "I'm So Pretty".

However, instead of driving home to New York City, Johnny drives just 20 minutes to the Sheldrake Hotel, where he gets hired immediately for the next season. Now financially secure, Johnny drives back to Kellerman's just as the talent show is about to end.

The planned magic tricks have been abandoned (the movie audience already has seen the tricks being practiced), so Johnny just grabs Baby from her table and leads her up onto the stage. Tito Suarez's orchestra begins to play Lionel Richie's song "Dancing on the Ceiling", and Baby and Johnny perform their dance. This time Baby leaps up into the lift fearlessly and flawlessly.

After that dance, the movie's denouement happens essentially the same way it happens in the current movie.

=====

Swayze argued that the denouement should include a moment revealing that Johnny would get together with Penny. After all, Baby was going away to college and career, so the movie audience should be happy to see Johnny and Penny get together.

=====

In the current movie, the final scene begins with Billy Kostecki putting a single record onto a record player and playing the song "The Time of My Life". During the denouement, however, the movie audience sees that Tito Suarez is conducting his orchestra, which is playing the song. At that moment, Max Kellerman asks Tito:

Do you have sheet music on this stuff?

Indeed, in the original story Suarez and his orchestra did have the sheet music, because Baby and Johnny had planned and practiced their performance and so had provided the sheet music to Suarez's orchestra.

Since all the practice for the talent-show dance has been removed from the movie, however, the final scene has to begin with Billy Kostecki putting the record onto the record player. Now the dance seems to be spontaneous, and the orchestra's sheet music is mysterious.

======

This article follows up four previous articles.

1) The Re-Writing of Eleanor Bergstein's Script

2) My Speculations About Eleanor Bergstein's Original Script

3) My Speculations About Script Changes Made by the Swayzes and by Rhodes

4) My Speculation About the Construction of the Story

My Praise for ABC's "Dirty Dancing" -- Part 1

On May 24, 2017, ABC broadcast the ABC original movie event (notice that expression on the poster) titled Dirty Dancing.

ABC does not call the movie a remake, which is the word used by most people who discuss the movie. Here in this blog article, I will use the expression ABC original movie (not remake).

If you have not seen the ABC original movie, then watching this video, made by Clevver News, summarizes it well.

Having watched the ABC original movie three times, I like it. I encourage people to watch the ABC original movie with an open mind. I encourage people who already have watched it -- even if they hated it -- to watch it again.

-----

The ABC original movie has received little praise. The website Rotten Tomatoes reports favorable reviews from only 20% of the professional reviewers and from 12% of ordinary reviewers. I will provide excerpts from four negative reviews.

Then I will provide my own, positive review.

-----

 Here are excerpts from a negative review, written by television critic Neil Genzlinger for The New York Times:

The Dirty Dancing phenomenon was never really about the story — or the music — or even the dancing. It was about the way those things came together at a particular moment in time for a particular audience in a gritty movie featuring two engaging stars.

That kind of lightning in a bottle can’t be recreated, a point ABC takes a wearying three hours to make on Wednesday night with its new, chemistry-free version of that beloved film. Most of the signature scenes are reproduced — watermelons are carried, a dance lift in a lake is attempted — but the emotional investment that made the 1987 movie an unexpected worldwide phenomenon is nowhere to be felt. ...

The music is also handled differently. Rather than having a soundtrack, the remake often has actors singing the numbers as they would on Broadway. But the device generally feels forced and isn’t used often enough to give this treatment the feel of a full-fledged musical. It’s more like “a movie in which actors occasionally burst into song for no reason.” A real musical deploys its songs organically; here they tend to interrupt rather than enhance.

The hope for this “Dirty Dancing” is presumably that it will both charm the original fans and appeal to viewers who today are the age that those fans were in 1987. But no young person in 2017 wants to hear another word about the 1960s. And the moviegoers who loved Dirty Dancing in the Reagan administration will recognize this new version for the sterile imitation that it is. ...

-----

Here are excepts from a second negative review, written by movie critic Mae Abdulbaki for The Young Folks:

Remaking one of the most popular and beloved movies in the history of cinema feels almost disrespectful on many levels. Going into the TV movie remake of Dirty Dancing with a clear and open mind, I figured that if at least the dancing was good, then there was something to enjoy. However, the updated version doesn’t even meet the lowest of expectations and blows past mediocre to land at downright terrible. The film is slow and dull, the lead actors have absolutely no chemistry, and the musical aspect doesn’t add anything to the film beyond being time-consuming.

The Dirty Dancing remake follows the same general storyline of the original film. It’s still set in the 1960s, Baby Houseman (Abigail Breslin) still ends up falling for Johnny Castle (Colt Prattes), and she still fights the expectations set by her father (Bruce Greenwood). However, it modifies some of the narrative and, to put it simply, makes it much more palatable and suitable for a younger audience. This Disney-washing, if you will, takes away some of the more serious and important aspects of the original film and makes it feel like more of a saccharine version of it. The remake also expands on several characters’ backstory, like that of Baby’s mother (Debra Messing) and father. This version of the film gives them marital problems and allows Baby’s sister, Lisa (Sarah Hyland), to develop outside of the story of simply falling for a jerk.

It’s important for any remake to set itself apart from the original film it’s based on, but Dirty Dancing only allows for so many changes and mostly follows the original narrative verbatim. The additional aspects–the singing, the expansion of some character dynamics, its attempts at being really cute – don’t add anything to the film at all. The TV movie is long, clocking in at two hours and ten minutes, and there are several instances where it becomes boring to watch. ....

-----

Here are excerpts from a third negative review, written by television critic Sonia Saraiya for Variety:

Dirty Dancing on ABC is a sappy, passionless, schlocky remake of the original, without even the iota of imagination necessary to expand upon the 1987 film. Nearly every element of the film that caught worldwide audiences’ imaginations has been sanded down into an advertisement-ready imagining of the swinging ‘60s.

What stands out most, surprisingly, is the smallest of details — the cast doesn’t sweat, even while they are dancing in the hot summer, or while they are making love in the middle of the humid night. There’s nothing dirty about this. And there’s barely even dancing: The production attached “Hamilton” choreographer Andy Blankenbuehler, but it’s unclear what they did with his talents, because dance sequences do not take up much of the film’s run-time, and what is seen is sadly below par. The average ABC viewer can see better on an off-week of Dancing With the Stars.

This is not to specifically ding lead Abigail Breslin, who is quite winning during the scenes where Baby is called upon to express emotions. But Dirty Dancing is a dance movie, and Breslin, while competent, is not a dazzling performer. Opposite her, Colt Prattes, who plays Johnny, is a better dancer but a far worse actor.

The two have all the chemistry of mannequins, which makes their already improbable love story completely incomprehensible. And then to make matters worse, they start singing — a bizarre departure from the mise-en-scene in a story that puts realism at the forefront. In the original film, when Swayze and Grey lipsync to “(I’ve Had) The Time of My Life” or “Love Is Strange,” there’s an impromptu enthusiasm to the scenes — just two kids singing along to their favorite songs. In the remake, those rareified moments of intimacy become another opportunity to showboat for the camera. ...

----------

Here are excerpts from a fourth negative review, written by film-maker Scout Tafoya for Roger Ebert.

.... Every room is a little too big and every actor is a little too far away from the camera, as in a multi-camera sitcom. [Director Wayne] Blair has no eye for the dancing, which is his most lethal failing. He has no sense of how to film bodies, the space needed to ensure we see the impressive physicality of each performer, no sense of how to communicate the sensual thrill of two people touching. Blair may well be trying to shoot around the lackluster choreography, which also fails the performers at every turn. The dancers may as well be rogue parade floats accidentally smacking into each other. The music direction is similarly ghastly. Slick, soulless covers of 60s and 80s pop and ballads stumble around like reanimated corpses on the soundtrack.

That's all bad enough, but the final 15 minutes detonate a nuclear bomb of misbegotten ambition in the viewer's brain. It dares you to reconsider your opinion of every poorly staged number and overacted monologue. Prattes' constipated Johnny Castle storms the dance hall for his closing performance, walks over to the table where Baby and her family sit, and delivers the now iconic line that lodged "Dirty Dancing" into popular cinematic imagination. His somnambulant read of "Nobody puts Baby in a corner" spurts from his lips like a mouthful of water he'd forgotten to swallow. A film which had been held together with hope and a prayer until this point, finally falls apart. ....

=========

Now I will provide my own, positive opinion of the ABC original movie. My basic arguments:

* Some stories become so implanted in our culture that they flourish with a multitude of variations and embellishments. Our culture is full of people who love the story and want to retell it. Younger generations of producers, directors, actors, musicians and designers will want to apply their own artistic talents to present the story to younger generations of audiences. We should welcome, appreciate and celebrate these creative efforts -- not denounce, mock and stifle them.

* You can enjoy a lot of fun, surprises and laughs by watching new presentations. For example, in the ABC original movie, the the actor who plays Johnny is much smaller than Patrick Swayze and the actress who plays Baby is much heavier than Jennifer Grey, and so the audience feels amused in anticipating and watching the lift movement in the final dance. It's funny!

* New presentations will fill in gaps in the original story, clarify fuzzy elements, add new characters and subplots, enlarge minor characters, challenge established assumptions and interpretations -- and thus enrich the original story.

* New presentations might attract other social groups to become fans of the story. For example, the ABC original movie adds an African-American character and enlarges the roles of the older characters.

* Some elements of new presentations might be improvements. For example, ABC's Neil Kellerman is a different, more realistic and thought-provoking character.

=========

In order to open your mind about the ABC movie, I suggest that you replace the  expression remake in your thinking with the word original movie. To help you do so, I will use the following expressions in this article:

* The ABC original movie.

* The Gottlieb original movie. (This is the 1987 movie that was produced by Linda Gottlieb and that starred Jennifer Grey and Patrick Swayze.)

* The San Pietro original movie. (This is a 2014 movie made by an Italian amateur theater club at the Communale San Pietro.)

* The Uskup original movie. (This is a 2012 movie made by a Umskup drama club in the Czech Republic.)

These four movies differ so much that each deserves to be called "original". Each can be enjoyed in its own circumstances and on its level.

If you were a tourist who happened to come across those live performances in Italy or the Czech Republic, you would have enjoyed watching them. You would have smiled and laughed the entire time. You would not have judged them harshly. They were just young foreigners having fun and putting their own spin on the story -- changing it into an Italian story or a Czech story, with their own cultural references and jokes.

Likewise, the new generations of Americans who made the ABC original movie have adapted the story to their own attitudes and sensibilities. By casting a grungy actor and a chubby actress into the lead roles, they have provocatively outraged the older generations that devoutly venerate the now ancient movie, which has become a sacred cow.

A grungy Johnny and a chubby Baby
in a "Dirty Dancing" for new generations. 

Many girls and young women now identify primarily with the Baby Houseman played by Abigail Breslin, an actress they have watched for many years.

======

The website IMDb lists 48 Tarzan movies, from 1918 through 2005. Each one can be appreciated on its own merits, as an original movie. We don't consider the last 47 of these Tarzan movies to be "remakes" of the first Tarzan movie that was made in 1918.

The Tarzan movies continue to be made for various reasons. They are exotic, exciting and funny. They feature an extraordinarily handsome male character. They can raise various cultural, political and environmental issues. The basic story is so well known that the audience keeps it in mind while watching new, alternate, spun-off stories.

======

In an earlier article in my blog, I wrote about the two Footloose movies -- released in 1984 and 2011. Each is a good movie, and each can be appreciated independently.

Of course, the Tarzan movies and the Footloose movies are based on written works that existed before the movies, whereas the Dirty Dancing movies are not based no a prior written work. However, very few people have read the Tarzan novel or the Footloose article. In the mind of the public that has not read the Tarzan novel, all the Tarzan movies are based on abstract story that has become a part of our culture.

Likewise, the Dirty Dancing story is so well known that the story -- as an abstraction -- has become a part of our culture.

======

Consider the story of The Wizard of Oz. Because of the 1939 movie, the story has become so well known that other works can be based quite loosely on the abstract story -- for example, Broadway musical The Wiz and the television series The Tin Man.

======

The Dirty Dancing story has been made into a stage musical (which I have not studied or seen). Somehow, moving the story from a movie onto a theater stage is "really fun". As an example of that open-minded attitude, here is an excerpt from a theater review written by Jane Horwitz for the Washington Post.

.... So, is this highly commercial, “live” re-creation of a beloved film an example of great and artful theatrical innovation? Nope, it is not. But is it really fun? Yup. ....

The characters talk a bit more about civil rights, Vietnam, and class conflict onstage. Musically, choruses of “We Shall Overcome” and “This Land Is Your Land” emphasize, somewhat awkwardly, growing political and social unrest. ....

You know the story: The Houseman family arrives for three weeks of fun in the Catskills at Kellerman’s resort. .... Baby jumps at the chance to learn Penny’s part for a steamy number with Johnny.

All these crises whiz by amid the strains of, among others, “The Time of My Life,” “Do You Love Me?,” “Cry to Me,” and the comical “Lisa’s Hula” for the hotel talent show. Audiences hear some master recordings from the film’s soundtrack, and other numbers performed live. A couple of terrific singers shine: Doug Carpenter, who plays Johnny’s cousin Billy Kostecki, belts a gorgeous “In the Still of the Night,” and Jennlee Shallow movingly solos on “You Don’t Own Me” and “We Shall Overcome.” ....

A few weaker links in the acting department dampen the fizz at times, but most such moments go by too fast to cause damage. ....

If it's "really fun" for a theater company to change the story so that the characters sing some of the songs and so that new songs are added, then it might be "really fun" if ABC exercises similar creativity.

========

In ancient Greece there were annual festivals that featured drama competitions. A mythical story -- for example the Oedipus Rex story -- would be chosen for the year's competition. The entire population already knew the mythical story from famous legends and poems. Various drama clubs were sponsored by wealthy patrons, and each club prepared a play and then performed it at the festival. A prize was presented for the year's best play.

Although each play was about the same mythical story, each play presented unique scripts, songs, characters and plot details. Watching the variety of plays was an enriching experience. The mythical story was elaborated. Some minor characters became major characters. Background details and subplots were added. New poetry and songs became popular. Citizens who attended such a festival and watched a dozen different plays about, for example, Oedipus Rex enriched their understanding of that mythical story.

Even if an Oedipus Rex play already had been performed many years previously, the various new plays performed at this year's festival were not considered to be "re-makes". Rather, each new play was appreciated as an original play.

========

The ABC original movie enriches the abstract "Dirty Dancing" story that has become a part of our culture.

Even if you watched the ABC original movie and hated it, the new idea has been planted into your mind that Jake as a young man used to work as a waiter at the Kellerman resort hotel and that he met Marjorie there. You never will get that idea out of your subconscious mind.

Similarly, people who watched the stage play know now that the song "We Shall Overcome" was sung at the Kellerman resort hotel during the Kellermans' vacation.

As the abstract story is told variously in separate dramas, new details are added -- for example, young Jake the waiter and the song "We Shall Overcome". This elaboration is similar to the drama-festival elaboration of the Oedipus Rex story in Greece's culture.

=======

This essay is the first in a series of four articles.

The series second article is here.

The Resort Hotel's Employees

None of Dirty Dancing’s dialogue mentions that anyone is or is not Jewish or addresses any particular Jewish concern. The overwhelming majority of the people who have watched this movie have not perceived that it takes place in particular Jewish cultural institution or that it has anything at all to do with Jews or Jewish concerns.

In fact, that very absence of Jewish concern is a major reason that the Borscht Belt disappeared. By the mid-1960s the Jewish population of New York had assimilated and prospered into American society. They could go to any resort and enjoy real upper-class life, not just a Jewish imitation. Every Jewish family had a television and could watch successful Jewish performers every day. Even the families that still did visit the Borscht Belt did so more as a familiar, family tradition that had become devoid of Jewish consciousness. Jewish families still preferred that their children eventually marry other Jews, but they also preferred that their children finish their higher educations first, so the Jewish parents’ mingling of their Jewish teenage children during summer vacations had lost its urgency.

A major irony of the Dirty Dancing story is that the main character, a 17-year-old girl in a prosperous family that is visiting such a resort hotel, prefers to spend her time and energy socializing with the employees who live in cabins behind the hotel and who dance in a vulgar, “dirty” manner in a dilapidated warehouse or in a remote forest, meadow and even a lake. For this girl, the cultural enrichment she acquires during her vacation is her encounter not with upper-class WASP (White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant) society, but rather with a lower-class society comprising Irish (e.g. Johnny Castle), Puerto Rican, Negro and various mongrel dregs.

The resort hotel where the movie takes place is called Kellerman’s, and it is owned by a man named Max Kellerman, played by a 63-year-old actor (Jack Weston). He apparently owns two such hotels, the other one being called The Sheldrake. Max Kellerman is assisted by his grandson, Neil Kellerman, who intends to enroll soon in the Cornell School of Hotel Management and who appears to be about 20 years old. This grandson Neil indicates in a remark that he already considers himself to be the owner of the two hotels, foreseeing that his grandfather will retire when he himself graduates from Cornell.

-----

The hotel employs a big-band orchestra, which seems to comprise mostly Cubans of African ancestry. We can assume that this orchestra alternates evenings between the two hotels and that the orchestra members do not do any work at the hotels besides playing music.

When the producers were selecting a resort as a location for the movie, they looked for a resort with a swimming pool, because the movie was supposed to show that the swimming pool was racially integrated. The author Eleanor Bergstein in her running commentary mentioned that the Jewish-owned resorts racially integrated their swimming pools before the other resorts did so, so apparently her original script included a reference to that fact. However, the producers could not find an available resort with a swimming pool (we do see guests swimming in a lake). Therefore none of the movie’s dialogue refers to the racial integration of the swimming pool, although the dialogue refers several times to the Civil Rights movement that was developing in the South in the early 1960s. We can suppose that the African-Americans in the planned swimming-pool scene would have been the orchestra members, who were idle during the days.

Several of the employees who live in the cabins and who dirty-dance in the warehouse are African Americans, but they probably are not orchestra members, who are older and are busy playing their music in the evenings while the young employees are dirty-dancing.

The orchestra conductor is about Max Kellerman’s age, and Max Kellerman seems to treat him as a social peer. We should understand that the orchestra members are an upper and distinct social class of the hotel’s employees. The orchestra members are older and are professionally established, and they rest during the mornings and days and work during the evenings and nights.

-----

Another category of employees works in positions that interact directly with the guests. For example, the movie dialogue mentions explicitly that the restaurant waiters are college students who work in the hotel during their summer vacations. We can suppose that this employee category includes also receptionists, social-activity leaders, life guards, and so forth. Most such employees were former guests who had visited the resort in younger years with their families.

In a scene that follows soon afterward, Mr. Kellerman is instructing the restaurant waiters about their conduct rules during their employment. He tells them:

You waiters are all college guys, and I went to Harvard and Yale to hire you. And why did I do that? Why? I shouldn't have to remind you. This is a family place. That means you keep your fingers out of the water, hair out of the soup, and show the goddamn daughters a good time -- all the daughters, even the dogs. Schlepp 'em out to the terrace, romance 'em any way you want. Got that, guys?

Although these employees are only waiters at the hotel, they are university students and also (although not stated in the dialogue) Jews who might be appropriate marriage candidates for the young women among the guests. Furthermore, the Jewish parents might even welcome romantic interest from such employees toward their daughters. One of the waiters, named Robbie Gould, is a medical student, and so he is treated very warmly by the family father, who himself is a doctor. It is apparent that the father considers this medical student to be a good romantic prospect for either of his two daughters.

-----

As Mr. Kellerman is completing his instructions to his waiters, another group of male employees walks through the restaurant, and Mr. Kellerman instructs them differently:

Well, if it isn't the entertainment staff. Listen, wise ass, you got your own rules. Dance with the daughters. Teach 'em the mambo, the cha-cha, anything they pay for, but that's it, that's where it ends. No funny business, no conversations, and keep you hands off.

This second group of male employees is dressed in matching shirts and is carrying guitars in cases, so it is apparent that they are a musical band. One of this group is dressed differently than the others, and he is the one who Kellerman addresses as “wise ass” and instructs about how to conduct himself with the guest families’ daughters.

Mr. Kellerman addresses this second group as “the entertainment staff” but later in the movie we see some of them doing ordinary jobs on the hotel grounds. We can suppose that some of them cook and wash dishes in the kitchen, clean floors, mow the grass and do other such jobs. In fact, they might not be paid at all by the hotel for playing music as a band. They play in the band only for tips and for the opportunity to acquire some public exposure as a band. Probably they can use the stage on the evenings when the orchestra plays at the other hotel. Their exposure provides them with some possibilities that some families might hire them later to play at Bar Mitzvah, wedding and anniversary parties. Apparently there is also a shortage of male guests at the dance classes for the guests, and so these band members fill in only as needed to correct the male-female ratio for partner dancing but are not supposed to socialize further with the female guests.

(We never see this band play in the movie. The DVD’s commentaries and interviews inform us that the producers had great difficulty convincing Patrick Swayze to accept the role of Johnny Castle, and furthermore Swayze’s own agent advised him against accepting the role. Eleanor Bergstein, the movie’s author, in her running commentary, reminisces about how, before the filming began, Swayze gave her a tape recording of a song, titled She’s Like the Wind, that Swayze had written and performed with a band that he headed in his real life. Therefore I speculate that in order to convince Swayze to accept the role, the producers agreed to provisionally include a scene where Swayze would perform his song with his band. Apparently the scene was removed from the movie’s final version, but the earlier scene where the band encountered Mr. Kellerman remained. As a consolation to Swayze, his song was included in the soundtrack.)

-----

Such a hotel would hire also a lot of female employees to work as housekeepers to clean the rooms. We never see Mr. Kellerman address them, but we do see them hanging around in and around the cabins and dancing in the warehouse.

These ordinary male and female employees – who cook and wash dishes in the kitchen, who clean the floors and do repairs, who mow the grass, who clean the rooms, etc. – were not supposed to socialize with the guests. A major reason for this restriction is that these employees were not Jewish, a fact that is obvious from their appearances – many are African-American or Hispanics.

-----

Two of the employees – Johnny Castle and Penny Johnson – are professional dancers, and they comprise an employee category of their own. They work as professional dancers only during the summers at the resort hotel. Johnny Castle, for example, works primarily as a house painter during the rest of the year. Their employment at the resort hotel comprises several elements:

• They performed special dances for the hotel guests while the orchestra played. They did so at both hotels.

• Then they encouraged the hotel guests to dance while the orchestra played. They were available to give special dance lessons to guests who were willing to pay for such lessons.

• They organized and conducted a talent show that was performed on the final night. Hotel employees were required to participate in the talent show and guests were encouraged to participate.

• They taught the employees to do group dances that were part of the talent show.

An early scene shows Johnny Castle and Penny Johnson dancing together spectacularly during a ballroom dance on the new guests' first evening at the hotel. Neil Kellerman remarked (to Baby Houseman) that they should stop dancing with each other and start dancing with the guests, because they would not sell dance lessons if they danced only with each other. Thus it seems that the hotel received a cut from the dance lessons that the professional dance instructors sold.

Since these dance-instructor jobs involved much socialization with the guests, the hotel owners would have preferred to hire Jews for these positions, but there simply was a shortage of Jews who could dance so expertly. Therefore non-Jews were hired, but they were supervised closely.

The movie includes several instances of such close supervision by Max Kellerman or by his grandson Neil Kellerman. In one instance, Max Kellerman motioned angrily to the two professional dancers that they should stop their dance performance and begin encouraging the guests to dance. In another instance, Neil Kellerman intruded without knocking into a room where Johnny Castle was giving a private dance lesson to the 17-year-old female guest. Neil Kellerman remarked that the dance lesson must last exactly as long as the time that the guest has paid for and also insisted that the talent show’s group dance by the employees be done in a dance style that Johnny Castle had rejected.

The two dance instructors have non-Jewish names – Johnny Castle and Penny Johnson – and they have personal appearances that are far from Jewish stereotypes.

When Penny Johnson became pregnant after an affair with the waiter Robbie Gould, she and Johnny Castle feared that they might be fired by the Kellermans as a consequence. One reason, which is not stated, was that the Kellermans valued the Jewish medical student Robbie Gould more as an employee than they valued the non-Jewish professional dancer Penny Johnson. If the pregnancy became known, then there would not be enough room on the hotel staff for both Gould and Johnson, and so Johnson would have to go. Gould came from a Jewish family that had been regular customers of the hotel for many years, and now he was attractive to Jewish families who had daughters who were entering a marriageable age.

Another problem caused by Johnson’s pregnancy was that she would not be available to dance in the hotel’s special performances. The pregnancy itself eventually might have prevented such performances, but the problem that developed in the movie was that she decided to have an abortion that had to be performed on a particular night when such a performance was scheduled. This situation led to a decision that the 17-year-old guest would learn the dance sufficiently well to substitute for Johnson on that one night. Many employees were young females, but none of them are available to learn the dance because they all were too busy cleaning the rooms during the days and preparing for the talent show during the evenings.

Since Penny Johnson was a couple months pregnant and since the story took place at the end of the summer, she apparently became romantically involved with Robbie Gould at the beginning of the summer or even during a previous summer while they were both working at the hotel. Penny Johnson sincerely loved Robbie Gould and expected to marry him, especially after she became pregnant. She was an extraordinarily beautiful and talented woman, but Robbie Gould could not consider marrying her, because she had not even graduated from high school and (although not stated) she was not Jewish.

Although Penny Johnson's status on the hotel resort's staff was much higher than the status of the female employees who worked as housekeepers and other such ordinary positions, she was subject to the same sexual rules probably applied to her and to all such female employees. They were forbidden to involve themselves in personal relationships with the male guests or20even with the Jewish male college students who worked as waiters, and any scandals were grounds for immediate firing.

The producers originally had selected an Italian-American actor to play the role of the male professional dancer. The producers soon decided that this first actor would not be able to dance as well as they expected, so they eventually replaced that actor with Patrick Swayze. The author Eleanor Bergstein indicated in her running commentary that this character thus ceased being an Italian-American character and instead became an Irish-American character. None of the dialogue indicates that this character is Irish-American, and the name Johnny Castle is not distinctively Irish, but perhaps this point was made by some dialogue that did not survive into the movie’s final version.

-----

One of the movie’s characters is Johnny Castle’s young cousin, Billy Kostecki, whose name is Polish (indicating the employees’ mongrel pedigrees). In some previous summer, Johnny Castle had convinced Max Kellerman to hire Castle’s cousin Billy Kostecki to do odd jobs at the hotel. Kostecki was about the same age as the 17-year-old female guest and apparently had began a platonic friendship with her during a previous summer when they both were quite young.

Billy Kostecki plays what the author Eleanor Bergstein describes as an "expository role" in the screenplay. At various moments, he explained the developing situation to the young female guest and thus to the audience. In particular, he told her that Penny Johnson had become pregnant and then later that the pregnancy was caused by an affair with the medical student Robbie Gould. In some other moments, Kostecki's explanations advanced and clarified the story conveniently for the audience.

Billy Kostecki also serves as a means to bring the young female guest into the employees' secret world. Kostecki was supposed to carry three watermelons from the kitchen to the remote warehouse where the employees were supposed to be practicing dances for the talent show. He was not able to carry all three watermelons safely, however, so when he noticed the young female guest, he asked her to help him by carrying one of the watermelons. Thus she accompanied him to the warehouse, where she saw and joined the employees, who have been doing their own dirty dancing instead of practicing for the talent show. Without Kostecki's role, the young female guest never would have gone into that warehouse and become involved with the other employees.

Bit 42 - Max Accuses Johnny

---

Date of Scene

Sunday, September 1, 1963

Morning

---

Scene Description

---

Dialogue

Max Kellerman
You know how you feel when you see a patient and you think he's all right. Then you look at the x-rays, and it's nothing like you thought?

Jake Houseman
What happened, Max?

Max Kellerman
It's exactly what it's like when you find out one of your staff's a thief.

Neil Kellerman
Moe Pressman's wallet was stolen when he was playing pinochle last night. It was in his jacket hanging on the back of his chair. He had it at.1:30, and when he checked again at quarter of four [3:45], it was missing.

Max Kellerman
Vivian thinks she remembers this dance kid Johnny walking by. So we ask him, "You have an alibi for last night?" He says he was alone in his room reading.

Neil Kellerman
There are no books in Johnny's room!

Baby Houseman
There's been a mistake. I know Johnny didn't do it.

Neil Kellerman
There's been similar thefts at the Sheldrake. It's happened here before. Three other wallets.

Baby Houseman
I know he didn't do it.

Neil Kellerman
Stay out of it, Baby.

Max Kellerman
(Walking away to talk to restaurant workers)
Wait. Don't put those tables together. Come on.

Baby Houseman
Daddy, I need your help. I know Johnny didn't take Moe's wallet.

Jake Houseman
Oh? How do you know?

Baby Houseman
I can't tell you. Just please trust me, Daddy.

Jake Houseman
I'm sorry, Baby. I can't.

Max Kellerman
(Returning to the table with a danish)
This Danish is pure protein.

Baby Houseman
Oh, Mr. Kellerman, look. Maybe Johnny didn't do it. Anyone could've taken it. Maybe it was, uh--

It could've been that little, old couple, the Schumachers. I saw her with a couple of wallets.

Max Kellerman
Sylvia and Sidney?

Jake Houseman
Baby, you don't go around accusing innocent people.

Baby Houseman
I even saw them at the Sheldrake. You said something was stolen from there.

Max Kellerman
(Addressing Baby)
I got an eyewitness, and the kid has no alibi.

(Addressing Neil)
Come on, Neil. You'll learn what it's like to fire an employee.

Baby Houseman
Wait a minute. I know Johnny didn't take the wallet. I know because he was in his room all night. And the reason I know is because I was with him.

---

Music

---

Remarks

Bit 36 - Dance Lesson (Love Is Strange)

---

Date of Scene

Saturday, August 31, 1963

Daytime

---

Scene Description

---

Dialogue

Baby Houseman
Two, three, cha-cha-cha.

My space. Where's my pleasing arc?

Spaghetti arms! Would you give me some tension, please?

You're invading my dance space. This is my dance space. That's yours.

Let's cha-cha. Don't look down. Look right here.

(Johnny and Baby mouth the lyrics of "Love Is Strange".)

(Neil Kellerman enters.)

Neil Kellerman
(Addressing Baby)
Baby, taking dance lessons? I could teach you, kid.

(Addressing Johnny)
Johnny, my grandfather put me in charge of the final show. I want to talk to you about the last dance. I'd like to shake things up a bit. You know, move with the times.

Johnny Castle
I've got a lot of ideas. I've been working with the staff kids on a cross between a Cuban rhythm and soul dancing.

Neil Kellerman
Whoa, boy. Way over your head here.

You always do the mambo. Why not dance this year's final dance to the pachenga?

Johnny Castle
Right.

Neil Kellerman
Well, you're free to do the same, tired number as last year if you want, but next year we'll find another dance person who'll only be too happy ...

Johnny Castle
Sure, Neil. No problem. We'll end the season with the pachenga. Great idea.

Neil Kellerman
(Addressing Baby)
Sometimes he's hard to talk to, but the ladies seem to like him.

See that he gives you the full half-hour you're paying him for, kid.

---

Song Lyrics

Spoken
Sylvia!

Yes, Mickey.

How do you call your Lover Boy?

Come here, Lover Boy!

And if he doesn't answer?

Oh, Lover Boy!

And if he still doesn't answer?

I simply say...

Sung
Baby, oh baby,
My sweet baby
You're the one.

Love is strange.
Lot of people
Take it for a game.

Once you get it,
You never want to quit.
After you've had it,
You're in an awful fix.

Many people
Don't understand.
They think loving
Is money in the hand.

Your sweet loving
Is better than a kiss.
When you leave me,
Your sweet kisses I miss.

---

Remarks

Bit 31 - Tense Family Breakfast

Jake and Marjorie Houseman

Baby and Lisa Houseman

---

Date of Scene

Friday, August 30, 1963

Daytime

---

Scene Description

---

Dialogue

Neil Kellerman
[On a loudspeaker] Singers, dancers, actors, this is your lucky day! Auditions for the annual Kellerman end-of-the-season talent show beginning in the playhouse.

[After approaching the Houseman's table] Everyone going to be in the show?

Jake Houseman
We're leaving tomorrow. Miss the weekend traffic.

Marjorie Houseman
But we're paid up until Sunday.

Lisa Houseman
And miss the show?

Jake Houseman
I said, we're leaving tomorrow.

Lisa Houseman
I was going to sing in the show.

Neil Kellerman
It's the big event. People bring their own arrangements. You don't want to miss it.

[To Baby] Baby, I need you for props.

Marjorie Houseman
Why would you want to leave early?

Jake Houseman
It was just an idea. We can stay if you want to.

[To Lisa] So, Lisa, what were you planning to sing?

Lisa Houseman
“I Feel Pretty" or ""What Do the Simple Folk Do?" or "l Feel Pretty." What do you think, Daddy?

---

Song Lyrics

---

Remarks

Bit 11 - Discovery in Kitchen

---

Date of Scene

Friday, August 23, 1963

Evening

---

Scene Description

---

Dialogue

Neil Kellerman
So, Baby, what do you want? You can have anything you want -- a brownie, some milk leftover rice pudding, beets, cabbage roll, fruit salad, sweet gherkins?

(Baby sees Penny crying on the floor in a corner.)

Baby Houseman
Oh, Neil, look, I'm sorry. I better go check on Lisa.

Neil Kellerman
Yeah?

Baby Houseman
Yeah.

---

Song Lyrics

---

Remarks

Bit 10 - Conversations By Woods

Neil Kellerman and Baby Houseman

---

Date of Scene

Friday, August 23, 1963

Evening

---

Scene Description

---

Dialogue

Neil Kellerman
I love to watch your hair blowing in the breeze.

Baby Houseman
Maybe my parents are looking for me.

Neil Kellerman
Baby, don't worry. If they think you're with me, they'll be the happiest parents at Kellerman's. I have to say it: I'm known as the catch of the county.

Baby Houseman
I'm sure you are.

Neil Kellerman
Last week I took a girl away from Jamie, the lifeguard. And he said to her, right in front of me: "What does he have that I don't have?" And she said, "Two hotels."

(Lisa Houseman and Robbie Gould rush out of the woods and talk at each other.)

Lisa Houseman
Robbie, I don't hear an apology.

Robbie Gould
Go back to Mommy and Daddy and keep listening. Maybe you'll hear one in your dreams.

Neil Kellerman
I'm sorry you had to see that, Baby. Sometimes in this world, you see things you don't wanna see.

You hungry? Come on.

---

Song Lyrics

---

Remarks