Why do we "turn" on the most popular shows?- Page 3

[Becky]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 7:37am

For the most part, we on the board like things that are more deeply theatrical, well-written and meaningful. To us, shows like Phantom, Cats and even Wicked, now, are fluff with no meaning, and even lacking in some basic good qualities of a Broadway musical (solid book, good lyrics, etc.)

I agree with you that in this type of community - you'll find people that are not your traditional theatergoer (or "mainstream" audience.) I've been seeing shows for 26 years now, and I tend to think I'm one of the people who like look for deep, theaterical, well-written, meaningful shows. However, the second part of your thought is one I may have to disagree with. Whether or not you feel a musical has a solid book, good lyrics, etc. can often be so subjective that it's impossible to claim that a musical doesn't have the above elements. There are the productions that are clearly not going for the deem/meaningful thing, but there are other shows that people attach that label to that I would say don't fit into that category. Just my opinion.

I have to say I love Wicked. It's one of my favorite scores - I love the lyrics - and it was incredibly meaningful to me. Do I think it's some life-changing piece of theater? Of course not. Does that mean I have no taste and I'm giving praise to a show that doesn't deserve it? Some will say yes and some will say no. Doesn't make either of us *right*. It just means we have differing opinions.

Updated On: 3/9/05 at 07:37 AM

[Jamie Hat]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 9:29am

Ooo good answers...

Someone said "Popular" doesn't always equal "good"...
Maybe, however,
I think we have to take into account that things become popular for a reason. (Mamma Mia!, CATS, Wicked, The Producers, the movie Titanic, MTV's the Osbornes, the Simple Life, etc etc etc)

There are us snobs who expect too much from a society that is growing exponentially dumber, and those who are perhaps "slightly less educated in certain fields" (to put it nicely), who are tired of us snobs telling them what (and what not) to like, say, or support.

It's like the Democrats and Republicans:
The Democrats say "we're smarter", and the Republicans say "so what? We're morally superior". Too much of a stretch? Did that work for anyone?

What a vicious cycle.

And I love everyone.

[Elphaba]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 9:43am

in my opinion, the average theater goer wants to be able to go 'Ohhh and Ahhh" at a show. The don't want to think about it. They simply want to be entertained. So shows like POTO, Producers,Wicked....and I suppose Cats (never saw it, don't want to) do just that.
Those of us with more interest in the theater sometimes want/need/whatever to be challenged by it. Urinetown challenged me.
And as others have said, we become "uppity" about our tastes. There is nothing wrong with Wicked (which I FINALLY get to see next month, YAY!)pRODUCERS, POTO, etc........but it's purely entertainment........no challenge, at least for me.
Titanic also challenged me.....now that I think about it, as did Into the Woods...

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 10:06am

People just want a reason to feel superior and by rejecting what is popular with the masses, they often feel as if they somehow have more discerning tastes. The problem is, often on this board, people seem to think there should only be one type of musical; intellectual challenging shows that don't appeal to the masses. If they had their way, Broadway would probably cease to exist because tourists would just go to the movies.

Shows are created for a variety of reasons and let's not forget that Broadway originated from shows based on entertainment value, NOT most intelligent books and scores. That is a more recent development. The early musicals often had little to no plot and were an excuse for singing and dancing, yet for some reason, now all musical theatre "fans" look down their nose at shows that resemble the early history of Broadway.

Broadway was originally about ENTERTAINMENT. It has evolved into much more over the past 100+ years, but why are we so eager to ignore its very core as if we are somehow too good for that? It's great to want to be challenged by a show, but why knock others who don't or the shows that aren't challenging? And there is certainly nothing wrong with enjoying all kinds of musicals for what they are and what they were intended to be.

Updated On: 3/9/05 at 10:06 AM

[Jamie Hat]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 10:13am

Well said Mister Matt.

[JBSinger]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 12:03pm

As a peice becomes a hit/mainstream - it then does become over-exposed and thus spoofable and cliche. What was interesting and original has moved into the standard. Does anyone watch Queer eye for the Straight guy with the same anticipation anymore? Has a Fosse black outfit "Roxie" move crept into popular culture? How many chandelier jokes/comments have there been?

Though I may not embrace the mainstream hits as I did when I first experienced them, I always try to remember those original intentions, experiences and the wonder of each piece.

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 12:43pm

Speaking personally, I have never turned on a show when it has become too popular. There are a few shows, Wicked being the most recent, where the hype has gotten so out of hand and the fans so unrealistic and out of touch, where I've wound up turning on the people themselves. I never had a real problem with Wicked, just thought it was fun for a mediocrity. Some of my favorite shows are rather mediocre. Then the Wicked mania started to build, growing to its height at around the same time I moved out to NY and discovered BWW. After a few months of honestly trying to communicate with these crazed shills online and offline, I found myself bashing the show severely, even though I kinda liked it.

When it's easy to pinpoint the things you hate about people (these shills) it's easy to figure out their soft spots. So if there are 50 irritating posters who all claim Wicked is "the greatest/most beautiful/ smartest/ etc" I'll wind up replying with 50 reasons and examples of this not being true. And we all know that, in their heyday, the worst of these manias is easily going to top 50-100 irritating uninformed posts in an evening. It was barely a conscious decision that I now disliked the show, it started as an attempt to inform these folks and, when that proved impossible, an attempt to be an a**hole to them so they'd leave.

Is this petty of me? Yes. But I'm someone who values the promotion of good musical theatre more than I value my own betterment. So, if you've been wondering the same thing, thinking that everyone turns on a show simply because it's popular, I'm saying it isn't always the case. If I see flaws in something, I may still enjoy it. But the flaws are still there. I'm not going to suddenly decide that it's too much to forgive, but if the fans of the show are actively making my life unpleasant, I'm going to fight back with what I have. And I'm not being overly-dramatic here. Between BWW, school, and the kids I teach and direct shows for, I would sometimes wind up explaining to 15 different people in a day why I don't think Idina is a genius or why I didn't have the CD on my iPod.

In cases like this, I'm not going to have a lot of reason to focus on anything but the negative side of a show- if only to avoid fueling the flame; to get people to stop asking me the same annoying questions and to stop making the same ridiculous claims about what shows I'll remember in 30 years.

[Becky]

Posted: 3/9/05 at 6:58pm

Broadway was originally about ENTERTAINMENT....but why are we so eager to ignore its very core as if we are somehow too good for that?

Wow Mister Matt. Love the whole post - very well said. I hadn't even thought about it from that perspective actually.