GO SEE the OFF-BROADWAY 'FRANKENSTEIN'- Page 2

[Loruh28]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 3:35pm

I never said that's why people were judging it. Did you even READ what I wrote? I said less popular. NOT off broadway. Less popular does NOT equal off broadway.

Should I mention I liked Lestat too?! Hahahahaha.

[SillyGirl2]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 3:38pm

Then how the hell can you sit and say that it's "not good"? You sir, don't have the right to say that without even seeing it.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 3:40pm

Why I Did Not Like FRANKENSTEIN, by Yankeefan007

1. Terribly bland, generic pop score that tried to emulate Frank Wildhorn. (Note: You know there's a problem when the so-called Wildhorn sound is what's being emulated.) Pop ballad after pop ballad, all the songs sounded the same and blended right in. Other numbers, like "Why" had no bearing on the plot and therefore could easily have been excessed.

2. Cliche book, which tried too hard to follow Mary Shelley's novel. Dialogue (and lyrics) were trite and tried too hard to be funny.

3. Sets should never look like you're playing "The Sims."

4. Poor casting choices. Hunter Foster is a musical comedy actor, and cannot carry a dramatic piece. He has too quirky a voice to be taken seriously.

5. Poor costuming. In the Victorian age, would Frankenstein really look like a costumed Steve Blanchard?

6. Heavy-handed direction which had the cast lumbering around the miniscule stage and making use of dozens upon dozens of useless staircases.


Shall I go on?

[jake6970]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 3:43pm

Damn, you really still can't understand sillygirl (which is a very fitting name, btw). I said PEOPLE, not me, might dislike it because THEY might think it's bad, and it's unfair to say they dislike it because it's less popular. I never said I think it's bad. Really, why is it so hard for you to wrap your brain around that?

[myManCape]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 4:06pm

The cast was simply horrid. Ill admit it looked nice on paper, but then again so did the Yankees. Noll and Bruno might have been the best in underwritten under used parts. The show was poorly written. If you want to stay true to the novel, then keep it to the novel. If you want to re-imagine it, then don’t say it’s the classic novel.
I liked the creative set and lighting but the musical direction and staging was so poor I wasn’t sure what I was supposed to be looking at. The re-orchestrated music killed anything they had established by recording a concept album.

It certainly wasn’t the worst thing out there, but it is not deserving of the praise you are giving it. And why are you requiring people to justify their dislike of the show when your original and subsequent posts offer no insight into why you liked it?

[Loruh28]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 6:27pm

"And why are you requiring people to justify their dislike of the show when your original and subsequent posts offer no insight into why you liked it?"

I have to be honest. I actually agree with you on this point. I'm on my way out the door but when I return home I'll be sure to point out the reasons I actually did enjoy this show. I would just appreciate it if I didn't get ridiculed and flamed for my reasoning.

[wicked_mimi]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 6:36pm

I do not think the show was the catastrophe everyone seems to think. I would have to completely agree with the costumes and the sets. The stairs were useless and the only costumes that really worked were that of Hunter's and Jim Stanek as the priest. I thought that the ensemble really were not necessary and that their choreography was a joke.

HOWEVER, I do think that everyone in the show did a good job and was well cast. I think Steve might've over-acted the whole "creature" aspect. If they chose to not use makeup they shouldn't have made him look like he was having convulsions half the time. I did think Hunter did a wonderful job and good for him for breaking out of his norm of musical comedic type roles. I thought Bruno and Noll were also very good, although Noll's acting didn't do as much for me when she wasn't singing. And then, the ensemble.... I believe I said above they were not necessary. I also don't think the role of his father needs to be as big as it was. His songs were boring and his whole character kinda stunk. The actor (I don't have the Playbill right here) did the best of what he had to work with but the material just didn't work for that character. I also liked Jim Stanek's character and how they chose to make him a priest to contrast Victor Frankenstein playing "God".

I don't think one should criticize the creative team though on trying to stay true to the Shelley novel since that was one of their main objectives in doing the show. I did think the music did try to go from power ballad to power ballad but that seems to be the style now. The only thing I didn't like was how repetitive they did sound yet you couldn't leave humming a single chorus.

So, in all, I do not think it was horrible... it just could use a lot of work but it is still worth seeing and not a waste of money.

[SillyGirl2]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 7:15pm

All right let's see what more trouble I can stir up now...

"Damn, you really still can't understand sillygirl (which is a very fitting name, btw)." <--uncalled for. You're dissing the show, not me, remember?

mymancape - I'm simply asking because everyone keeps saying how they hate it. I would like to see the different takes on it. I'm not FORCING I am asking. Who said you had to answer? No one. I'm sorry that my curiosity is an annoyance to you. And YES, I didn't say anything about the show because hey! I made this thread to invite people to go see it. It's a show in a time of need, so I figured it needs all the help I can get. Is that so wrong?

Since people seem to wonder why I like the show..I'll say it. And then as Loruh said, I'll get flamed for it. Because you know...here on broadwayworld, if you have an opposing opinion, you may as well be shot.

-I love the cast. Maybe I'm biased because I'm friends with a bunch of them, but I think they are ALL truly talented people. I think their singing and acting is wonderful. Yes, even Hunter and even Steve. I like Hunter. His facial expressions may be funny but hey, I think he's doing a great job. In my opinion, Steve is fantastic. And NO I am not his wife/gf/daughter/anything. I'm simply a friend/fan. I love his voice and I think his acting in this show is great. He does a wonderful portrayal of a psychologically corrupted being. "The Creature" should not be portrayed as a normal human being, lest we forget. So therefore, I THINK that he is doing a great job. (take note of all the things saying I THINK/ IN MY OPINION/ ETC.)

-The set is very minimal, and doesn't seem to resemble anything. That's what the projections are for. And while, yes, they draw away from the emotions and acting and singing, they serve their purpose. This is off-broadway people. What are you expecting, a gigantic set where a dragon is guarding the stage, where there's a huge barricade, where there's a crashing chandelier, where there's a big sorority house? Besides, Spring Awakening has no set. How the hell can that get such praise with no set? Oh my word! They have no set! That's so terrible! I can't believe it! Such blasphemy! The minimality of the set just brings out the actors more, and I THINK it gives the audience a chance to feel more of the emotions of the show.

-The music: So this is obviously just me, but I love the music. I'll admit, there are times where the orchestrations are a mess and way too overloaded, but generally, I adore it. I already said I love each and every cast members' voice.

Again, take note of the fact that the ENTIRE "review" - if you want to call it that - is IN MY OPINION.

And now, I am ready be bashed.

[Mealz1042]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 7:21pm

not bashing, just one thing i didnt like was that the "creature" looked did not look as horrifying as he probably could have.

[SillyGirl2]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 7:37pm

That's true. I don't know about that costume choice, but I'm not gonna complain.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 7:49pm

Friend as in you two go out for coffee and gabbing, or friend as in you've seen him at the stage door and he remembers you?

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 8:23pm

He does a wonderful portrayal of a psychologically corrupted being.

A first-hand expert opinion! I'll mark that one as valid.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 8:28pm

"This is off-broadway people. What are you expecting, a gigantic set where a dragon is guarding the stage, where there's a huge barricade, where there's a crashing chandelier, where there's a big sorority house?"

I've seen incredible sets Off-Broadway. Die Mommie Die, The Receptionist, Blackbird, Crazy Mary, just off the top of my head.

[SillyGirl2]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 8:41pm

"Friend as in you two go out for coffee and gabbing, or friend as in you've seen him at the stage door and he remembers you?" <-- Why the hell does that matter?

"I've seen incredible sets Off-Broadway. Die Mommie Die, The Receptionist, Blackbird, Crazy Mary, just off the top of my head." <--Okay.

"A first-hand expert opinion! I'll mark that one as valid." <--yo...did I say my opinion was the only one? No. That's why I STRESSED that it was an OPINION! Do I think I know everything? NO. I am expressing my opinion. Last I heard, everyone was entitled to one.






Updated On: 11/24/07 at 08:41 PM

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 8:43pm

If he's someone you fratenize with, then he's your friend. If he knows your name because you've met him at the stage door 20 times, then he's just an actor who knows your name.

[SillyGirl2]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 8:44pm

Whatever. I consider him a friend. The relationship between he and I is exactly that. Between he and I. If he considers me a friend, fine. If not, I don't care. I consider him a friend, and that's all that matters. End of story.

Next flame...

[Little-Lotte]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 9:56pm

I personally loved the show! Is it perfect, no! But honestly what show is! Unfortunately nowadays audiences are more interested in musicals that are fun and/or comedic. They want to see musicals to escape, and not to be overtaken by drama. Serious pieces are more reserved for plays, not musicals. I personally believe that if Les Miserables were to premiere now, it would be a failure. The pop opera is apparently dated and anything that remotely resembles it sucks!

I don't personally understand how the previous workshops which had much of the same music and dialogue where given praise and rave reviews and this "final product" has been so hated. Something is just not adding up to me, but that's for another thread.

I'll be honest I probably wouldn't have seen the show if I weren't friends with one of the cast members. And yes, I mean friends in that we go out to eat together and we talk on the phone, etc. So don't try to pull that crap on me. I'm very thankful that I did get to see it because there are some brilliant (in my opinion) theatrical moments in this piece. I think the score is wonderful. I know Wildhorn is very taboo and a lot of people aren't fans. But there are many that do like his work and I think comparing this score to his work is a good thing. Other people agree and obviously others don't. Such is life!

I've seen both YF and this and I found this to be a much stronger production. If YF wasn't such a big name and didn't have Mel Brooks attached, I think it would flop. Mel Brooks did it right with The Producers (which I LOVED) but in YF he fell really short!

No one is gonna change anyone else's opinions. So it's pointless to bitch and fight with each other about it. If you don't like it, fine. If you did, great. Let people judge for themselves whether they like something or not. I hate when people judge a show without seeing it. This is Off-Broadway, you can get theater tickets for really cheap, so take a chance especially with the whole strike thing going on! If your interested in the novel, the actors, the music, or whatever, go and see it and then form your own opinion! That's just my two cents! Really all this fighting about it doesn't make anyone look good.

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 10:13pm

Well all the reviews I could find said it sucks, which is too bad considering the talented cast.

[SillyGirl2]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 10:20pm

I know. The critics don't like it. Which figures because usually when critics don't like it, I do....yay for opposites..


"No one is gonna change anyone else's opinions. So it's pointless to bitch and fight with each other about it. If you don't like it, fine. If you did, great. Let people judge for themselves whether they like something or not. I hate when people judge a show without seeing it. This is Off-Broadway, you can get theater tickets for really cheap, so take a chance especially with the whole strike thing going on! If your interested in the novel, the actors, the music, or whatever, go and see it and then form your own opinion! That's just my two cents! Really all this fighting about it doesn't make anyone look good."

Amen to that. (no pun intended..)
Updated On: 11/24/07 at 10:20 PM

[Joy Behar]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 11:04pm

Ok. I am a long time reader, but this is my first time posting. In fact, I had never even registered on this site before. But, after reading the title of this thread, I had to sign up so that I could say...

DO NOT GO SEE THE OFF-BROADWAY FRANKENSTEIN.

I don't mean to be cruel, but this really was the worst production I have seen in recent memory. The cast, for the most part, was very talented. However, the show itself is wretched. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either a crazed Blanchard fan, or a con-artist working for 37 Arts.

Go see something else. Anything else.

[SillyGirl2]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 11:22pm

Hey now. I am not at 37 Arts con artist, and more than just a crazed Blanchard fan. I love for all the cast members. So that's not an excuse.

Please don't tell people not to see a show because you think it's terrible. We're just trying to get out of that habit in this thread. lol

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, yes. But give everyone and everything a decent chance before you judge them. =)

[Little-Lotte]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 11:24pm

Funny that I don't work at 37 Arts and this is the only role I actually like Steve in, but say what you will. Perhaps you work for YF since out of all the threads this the one you decide to post and you're making condescending accusations out of no real facts.

[Joy Behar]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 11:32pm

1. I don't work for Young Frankenstein.

2. Frankenstein is really pretty bad.

3. Young Frankenstein wasn't that great either.

4. Frankenstein is worse than Young Frankenstein.

5. Kate Shindle is awesome.

[broadwaybound882]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 11:37pm

I too have been keeping a close eye on this board and I must say one thing and if people expect me to respon to this, they are wrong. For one post where the prupose merely is to promote an Off-Broadway show, the bashing going on here is ridiculous, if not childish. To go to lengths as to insenuate the fact that people are "con artstis" or "crazy whoever fans" is just simply ridiculous. It truly is sad to see the levels of garbage users have posted on this board and should be any "sane" mind be taken into consideration whether further participation on this board is right for them morally.

[jaystarr]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 11:39pm

Best Thread for the Day

Boxing Match for Frankenstein



At Stake: Frankenstein's BWW reputation!
Updated On: 11/24/07 at 11:39 PM