Profile for helloworld2

Sorry - on now!

^ ...what?

I came across this blog that does "Guess the Broadway Star" posts every once in awhile, and thought some people here might get a kick out of it: http://broadwayobsession.tumblr.com/tagged/guess_the_broadway_star/

I suppose I should have worded it more constructively, but it's just really hard to look at the site...that's what I intended to get across :)

And the $1 million dollar nut (whatever that means) -- I've not seen anybody actually acknowledge that number. That number came directly from an interview with Julie Taymor...I believe the 60 Minutes one, although I could be mistaken about that part.

I fail to see how design is any less of a factor in a magazine's merit than grammar, dramamama. If the site can't even be read without it being headache-inducing, how is that any "sillier" to point out than spelling errors?

But they're not watching the show nightly, getting a sense of what is working and what isn't. Actually, I read an article that said that Michael Cohl (sp?) was filming the show and streaming over the internet the next day. Not ideal, but it's not as if they're burying their heads in the sand. They're trying. I still think that they should just bring some other people in, but I don't think that'll even come close to happening.

This person seemed to enjoy it too, so maybe it is improving?: http://www.showbiz411.com/2010/12/06/spider-man-on-broadway-a-week-later-show-takes-flying-leap-forward ETA: It also says that they're working on a new ending. I haven't seen it yet, but that sounds like good news based on what everyone is saying.

I wanted to have a look, but then the hot pink background burned my eyes and I couldn't tell if I liked it or not.

dramamama, those are all valid reasons, none of which were given in the post I was pointing out. The original post simply said that they only support "good" theater. My point was that they can't know if it's good, so they could either have given a different (and more valid) reason, or not said anything at all.

I didn't say (or even come close to saying) that you have to support it. My point was that you should at least have some knowledge of what it is you're choosing not to support...because it's not as if you're unaware of the project and therefore are unintentionally missing it, or missing it out of apathy. You're going out of your way to say that you won't support it without having seen it or even possessing knowledge of it that doesn't come mainly from speculation. THAT was my point.

A bad show shouldn't be supported. It should be kicked out so that something else can take it's place. I support good theater. Not theater in general. There's a lot of bad theater in the world. It looks like Spiderman fits that bill. A) Have you seen it? and B) Then you're opening up a whole can of worms with the discussion of what constitutes "good". I think saying you won't support it simply for the sake of it not being worthy, so to say, without further explanation is a little bit foolish ...

My problem with the article about the heckler is that it makes it sound as if it's okay for people to just scream out what they're thinking in a theatre, as if it makes them charmingly opinionated instead of just plain rude.

I get the feeling that Julie Taymor's attitude is somewhat like "if you don't get it, you must not be up to my level" as opposed to "since everyone's not getting it, it must be wrong".

Perhaps this is a stupid question - forgive me if there's some kind of obvious answer - but why can't they bring in someone else to work on the music and/or book, either as a ghostwriter or as a collaborator?

I disagree on almost all counts.

Brian d'Arcy James: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOydQFJdx1k

I mean do well in terms of my own opinion of it, I guess. Really, that's all I care about when I'm seeing a show. The pics (again) should not have just gone 'all the way' with a comic book look or 'all the way' with a realistic theatre look as its MERGING the 2 art forms. You (again) are saying this as if you had a part in the shoot, when I'm sure you didn't; your OPINION should not be stated like it's correct and everyone else is a moron for disagreeing. You can like the "photos" if you choo...

I want this show to do well. I'm reserving my judgement of the costumes, etc., until I see how they work in the context. But I am judging these "photos", and I find them hideous. This isn't a comic-book feel to me, it's just overly processed. They should have either gone fully one way or the other - straddling the line between cartoon and realistic photography just ends up looking like a mess.

These didn't look like comic books. They looked overly photoshopped.