Tarzan Closing

[IcicleM]

I LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE The Hunchback of Notre Dame. The way they did it for Berlin was spectacular. It is ALSO much more like the book adaptation than the movie was. Parisians hated the Disney movie so much, haha. they especially hated how Esmeralda survived in the end, because that's definitely not how it's supposed to go. If you look on youtube, you can see a whole bunch of clips from the show. If you look for the fan website, you can find the ENTIRE script (in English) as well as German and English translations for the songs. It's a beautiful show, and the music is incredible. If Schwartz would just please please look at it again, then Wicked wouldn't have to be his final great accomplishment!

I have the program for Mary Poppins and the Playbill explained all of what you said, but I didn't realize it was Mackintosh specifically who had the book rights. I found that very interesting, and I think the mesh worked very very well. What a beautiful show

 

[raven]

I LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE The Hunchback of Notre Dame. The way they did it for Berlin was spectacular. It is ALSO much more like the book adaptation than the movie was. Parisians hated the Disney movie so much, haha. they especially hated how Esmeralda survived in the end, because that's definitely not how it's supposed to go. If you look on youtube, you can see a whole bunch of clips from the show. If you look for the fan website, you can find the ENTIRE script (in English) as well as German and English translations for the songs. It's a beautiful show, and the music is incredible. If Schwartz would just please please look at it again, then Wicked wouldn't have to be his final great accomplishment!

I have the program for Mary Poppins and the Playbill explained all of what you said, but I didn't realize it was Mackintosh specifically who had the book rights. I found that very interesting, and I think the mesh worked very very well. What a beautiful show

I never saw the Berlin production but I have the recording and designs of the set and lighting plots. I was amazed that the entire stage itself was divided into grated lifts that raised and lowered in many configures to help create the scenes. They also had lighting and scenic projectors under them that helped create things.

 

[artvandelay]

I never saw the Berlin production but I have the recording and designs of the set and lighting plots. I was amazed that the entire stage itself was divided into grated lifts that raised and lowered in many configures to help create the scenes. They also had lighting and scenic projectors under them that helped create things.

Who's the LD for Hunchback?

 

[EpcotServo]

Funny...I was just thinking about how you could actully make more money with a flop, then you could with a hit!

 

[Figment82]

Funny...I was just thinking about how you could actully make more money with a flop, then you could with a hit!

I LOVE LOVE LOVE The Producers! I was quite sad that it closed a few months ago as I never got a chance to see it one more time. I guess 5 times is a nice round number anyway. I can't wait until Young Frankenstein opens, especially because my love Roger Bart has a lead role.

 

[raven]

I LOVE LOVE LOVE The Producers! I was quite sad that it closed a few months ago as I never got a chance to see it one more time. I guess 5 times is a nice round number anyway. I can't wait until Young Frankenstein opens, especially because my love Roger Bart has a lead role.

One of our past marketing directors from our theatre saw a rough draft of the show a few years ago out in SF. She said back then that they were trying to get it to Bway and that was before Mel Brooks Producers was even out yet. But I cannot wait either since it is one of my favorite movies! :wave:

 

[raven]

Who's the LD for Hunchback?

The lighting designer was Rick Fisher. I read a lengthy article aout it several years ago in Entertainment Design magazine. It had lots of drawings, sketches and pictures from the productions as well as detailed technical specs (all the stuff I get into!). :wave:

Too bad it never transfered out of Berlin (probably due to the high technical elements) but you can read a little about it and see a few pictures here:

http://home.alphalink.com.au/~paga/hunchback/theatre.html

 

[TheDisneyGirl02]

I saw Tarzan last year and I liked it...it is my least favorite of the Disney b-way shows though. However, I LOVE the music for Tarzan. The music is great and parts of the show were awesome, but overall it was too green.

Mary Poppin's was fantastic and I think it was ROBBED at the Tony Awards!

 

[IcicleM]

I saw Tarzan last year and I liked it...it is my least favorite of the Disney b-way shows though. However, I LOVE the music for Tarzan. The music is great and parts of the show were awesome, but overall it was too green.

Mary Poppin's was fantastic and I think it was ROBBED at the Tony Awards!

Totally completely and utterly ROBBED!

Now, back in the day, if this musical were judged the way The Lion King and Beauty and the Beast were, then it would be awesome. But, sadly, the stupid writers for Spring Awakening were too clever for us... They wrote a musical that contrasted with the theme of the show. They wrote a Punk Rock musical for a show that took place in a time when talking about making love was too controversial. The original PLAY that came out many decades ago was shunned and hated. But when it's made into a Punk Rock Musical, all of the sudden it's the new RENT. I really despise that... What happened to Wicked and Mary Poppins was awful... But because Punk Rock and Alternative Rock music is the hit for today's audiences, it shone through...

 

[ToTBellHop]

I saw Tarzan last year and I liked it...it is my least favorite of the Disney b-way shows though. However, I LOVE the music for Tarzan. The music is great and parts of the show were awesome, but overall it was too green.

Mary Poppin's was fantastic and I think it was ROBBED at the Tony Awards!

Robbed? Have you seen Spring Awakening? It deserved its 8 Tonys, no questions asked. I loved Mary Poppins, but Spring Awakening is the most powerful 2 hours to come to Broadway in awhile, and the lighting design is stunning. Definitely not a family show, though.

 

[clarkstallings]

Spring Awakening should not have gotten the choreograpy tony. Spring Awakening's music is neither engaging or sophisticated. Spring Awakening arrived on Broadway about ten years too late. Spring Awakening was not the best musical. The Tonys are too political though. Very rarely does the right show win best musical, think Ragtime, Into the Woods, Chicago, etc. Thank God for Mel Brooks and his musical theatre genius! There is hope for Broadway yet!

 

[ears2you]

personal opinion (dont shoot me)

the show wasnt all that great. it had great effects in some cases but it wasnt the best it could have been


it was a momentary crowd pleaser but couldnt bring people back for more

 

[ToTBellHop]

Spring Awakening should not have gotten the choreograpy tony. Spring Awakening's music is neither engaging or sophisticated. Spring Awakening arrived on Broadway about ten years too late. Spring Awakening was not the best musical. The Tonys are too political though. Very rarely does the right show win best musical, think Ragtime, Into the Woods, Chicago, etc. Thank God for Mel Brooks and his musical theatre genius! There is hope for Broadway yet!

well that's your opinion, and not one shared by many. The crowd reaction last night was the most enthusiastic I have seen for any show, anywhere. I might be tempted to agree with you on choreography, since there isn't much actual dancing. I found the music to be very witty and haunting, myself. I certainly found it to be a show anyone who's grown up can relate to, and 10 years too late? I really don't think so. With all of the conservatism that has become rampant in America this decade, we could use something with the messages of Spring Awakening. To suggest that the only room for the rock musical lies with Rent, which will likely close soon anyway, is to limit variety on Broadway. The greatest thing about Spring Awakening is the tremendous amount of energy that the very young cast puts into the show. They are very good at acting 14. Better than that Riverdance under the sea rubbish that just closed on 42nd street (and I am admittedly looking forward to its replacement in the fall).

By the way, don't really care about the thread drift, as none of this belongs in this particular forum.

personal opinion (dont shoot me)

the show wasnt all that great. it had great effects in some cases but it wasnt the best it could have been


it was a momentary crowd pleaser but couldnt bring people back for more

I don't think you'll get shot for that. Tarzan was pretty much hated by all (even the hardcore Disney fans here have trouble calling it good, and the hardcore theatre fans had an even lesser opinion). Tarzan is a very empty show...with good music and sets.

 

[raven]

I have not seen Tarzan as the staging and lack-of-a-set doesn't appeal to me. I love the music...but it just seems like it was put together very fast.

I haven't seen Spring Awakening either but I've heard nothing but great things about the show. A friend of mine went to NYC to see it and talked to the actors afterwards for about 45 minutes. This was pre-Tony's and the nominations weren't out yet.

As I said before it takes a lot to impress me since my job is actually creating theatre effects so I always see these shows with an open mind. But if the first images aren't powerful enough I have been known to either sit and read the playbill or just leave.

 

[BRER STITCH]

Robbed? Have you seen Spring Awakening? It deserved its 8 Tonys, no questions asked....Spring Awakening is the most powerful 2 hours to come to Broadway in awhile, and the lighting design is stunning.

Says, YOU!
There's LOTS of us out here who would respectfully disagree! :lol:

I found Spring Awakening a total bore with mostly forgetable music and unimpressive chorography, along with very amateurish performances (aside from perhaps Jonathan Groff and Lea Michele). The rest of the cast is under written and poorly conceived and have no real opportunity to shine.

This show should never have left the comforts of "off-Broadway", where it's onstage seating and band would not have been such huge distractions.


Shock value?...Perhaps.
But is that really what makes good theater?

That's exactly why there are so many other shows appealing to so many other tastes.

No harm or disrespect intended, but I just couldn't let your initial quote (above) go unchallenged, as it is your opinon ...and one that is not universally accepted as fact.

Now...back to our regularly scheduled program....

:wave:

 

[ToTBellHop]

^^I would not consider it "lots" of people, since the show has received outstanding critical acclaim and is running at near 100% capacity, which is very impressive for an adult-oriented show on Broadway--all of the other shows that run at 100% capacity are family-friendly like The Lion King, Wicked, and Jersey Boys. I think you may have missed the point of the on-stage seating clearly simulating the other students in the class, and if the band on the stage is a distraction, I would bet you don't like Chicago, either (also your opinion, but as the longest-running revival in Broadway history, I think you'd be in the minority). No Broadway show appeals to everyone, but to make comments like "this show should never have left the comforts of 'off-Broadway'" is ridiculous. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it should not be placed in a venue where its (nearly) universal appeal can be appreciated by more people. Please do not see Xanadu, though. I don't find on-stage seating to be a distraction so much as a way to make the fourth wall further dissolve by making it seem less like a theatre (and since most of the music serves to break the fourth wall, this is completely complementary). What makes good theatre? Actors who can express their characters' emotions so well in both their singing and mannerisms that the entire audience feels what they feel, and scenic and lighting design that magnifies those emotions (and choreography, which worked in songs like "The B**** of Living", "I Believe", and "Totally F*****"). I felt every bit in tune with what the characters were feeling, and the fact that they were bringing a 116-year old play to a modern audience was very exciting to me. I just don't find the reason for the popularity to be "shock value." This is a 116-year old play, and most of the issues the musical deals with were in the play, so this is nothing new or shocking to theatre, especially 11 years after Rent opened.

 

[BRER STITCH]

^^I would not consider it "lots" of people, since the show has received outstanding critical acclaim and is running at near 100% capacity, which is very impressive for an adult-oriented show on Broadway--all of the other shows that run at 100% capacity are family-friendly like The Lion King, Wicked, and Jersey Boys. I think you may have missed the point of the on-stage seating clearly simulating the other students in the class, and if the band on the stage is a distraction, I would bet you don't like Chicago, either (also your opinion, but as the longest-running revival in Broadway history, I think you'd be in the minority). No Broadway show appeals to everyone, but to make comments like "this show should never have left the comforts of 'off-Broadway'" is ridiculous. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it should not be placed in a venue where its (nearly) universal appeal can be appreciated by more people. Please do not see Xanadu, though. I don't find on-stage seating to be a distraction so much as a way to make the fourth wall further dissolve by making it seem less like a theatre (and since most of the music serves to break the fourth wall, this is completely complementary). What makes good theatre? Actors who can express their characters' emotions so well in both their singing and mannerisms that the entire audience feels what they feel, and scenic and lighting design that magnifies those emotions (and choreography, which worked in songs like "The B**** of Living", "I Believe", and "Totally F*****"). I felt every bit in tune with what the characters were feeling, and the fact that they were bringing a 116-year old play to a modern audience was very exciting to me. I just don't find the reason for the popularity to be "shock value." This is a 116-year old play, and most of the issues the musical deals with were in the play, so this is nothing new or shocking to theatre, especially 11 years after Rent opened.

At least I respected YOUR opinion.
Some day you may learn to respect others'.

You obviously liked it.
I didn't.

But to clarify...

a) I missed no points about the onstage seating and what it represented. In the show I saw it was a very distracting group.
b) I loved Chicago. Wrong assumption on your part. I didn't feel the onstage musicians were a distraction in that show. I thought they were in SA.
c) It's my opinion that the show fit MUCH better on an off-Broadway stage and would have enjoyed a long, healthy run there too. I saw it on both, so felt qualified to make the distinction. Sorry if that was not clear in my original post.
d) Opinion = a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

We've all got one and they're all right!!

 

[clarkstallings]

ISTCNavigator,

I'm not wanting to critique your opinion, but I'm just wanting to know what you think the message of Spring Awakening is? Spring Awakening represents a problem, a cancer, that is rampant in theatre in this country. The night of the Tonys, SA's cast/crew members could blog via their cell phones on the SA web site the emotions they were feeling. One message that was posted to the site by someone related to the show said, "Broadway has been changed forever." I personally take offense at the presumption in that comment. Spring Awakening hardly broaches any new topic for Broadway. While the story is compelling, when you distill it down to its essence, it is nothing more than a show with songs that use the same few chords over and over again either strummed or arpegiated, uses gimmicky staging (think handheld microphones and the audience sitting on stage,) and tells its audience that what it is doing is revolutionary. Thankfully, there are those who realize that it is nothing special. It's a flash in the pan. I still respect it as a work of art, though I might not like it, and I wish all involved with the show the best of luck.

 

[Giraffe Lounge]

I can't wait until Young Frankenstein opens, especially because my love Roger Bart has a lead role.

I thought I couldn't wait, then the $450 price tag made me reconsider.
http://www.playbill.com/news/article/109202.html

 

[Giraffe Lounge]

I thoroughly enjoyed Mary Poppins and think shows of its kind have a great place on Broadway as purely entertaining fare. But it is in no way comparable to Spring Awakening which is extremely successful and accessible while having some highly unconventional components to its narrative and a holistic approach in its presentation through its design and seating. Additionally, overall its score is extremely strong and its characters relatable and real.

Spring Awakening represents a problem, a cancer, that is rampant in theatre in this country. ...someone related to the show said, "Broadway has been changed forever." I personally take offense at the presumption in that comment.

Wow-- somebody takes things way too seriously. It was a very important moment in their lives and they were excited about it, and most of them are extremely young. I was backstage when they won the award and I can tell you that most of them were extremely courteous, professional young adults.