AMERICAN PSYCHO CLOSING- Page 7

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 11:11am

Probably.

[MrsSallyAdams]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 11:16am

Is it fair to say the show could live in Gay-focused regional theaters? My gay friends were intrigued by the beefcake ads and production photos while my female friends said they would "never see" a work based on a "misogynistic book." 

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 11:25am

Would they be offended by gay slurs from the 80s? If so, no.

[hork]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 11:31am

Mr Roxy said: "The comparison is that it seems to be that when in doubt transfer a full-length cartoon movie to the stage. The fact that people continue to buy it instead of trying something different escapes me. Cannot fault Disney . As long as people keep eating it up, they will keep churning it out. Does not reflect well on the theater going public. Moral of the story is just appeal to the lowest common denominator and you will be fine.

Since when is Disney the "lowest common denominator"? Most of the best movie musicals of the past 30 years were made by Disney. The Lion King is a beautifully artistic and technically innovative show. I don't see the difference between putting Frozen on stage and putting, say, An American in Paris on stage. They're both terrific movie musicals that easily translate to the stage, so why not?

[mailhandler777]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 11:41am

ClumsyDude15 said: "I just want to clarify because as mailhandler pointed out about our mutual friends and such, I was not meaning anyone specific that I know, I was speaking in the sense of how dramamama meant it. It doesn't fit the MO of the usual Wicked fan, and if Broadway came with one of those Barnes and Noble recommendation slips - it wouldn't recommend American Psycho to the person who loves Wicked. Also, I just would like to point out that having not seen American Psycho is not relevant to the topic at hand."

 

And the way I meant it is most Wicked fans I know loved the show. I don't know what the other millions of Wicked fans like or don't like. I don't think about what "usual" Wicked fans tend to like because I don't know them so I have no clue what would be in their MO(however you would word that).

 

I used you as an example of one those Wicked fans who hasn't seen it yet because well you haven't...lol. 

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 11:51am

Officially American Psycho appears to only credit the novel as source material with no mention of the film, so technically this is not a film to stage adaptation, but rather a novel to stage adaptation. (Of course, it does pull several images directly from the film, but the screenplay/film are not credited.)

 

 

[After Eight]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 11:56am

"Yes, it is easier for a show that already has mainstream appeal on paper to succeed."

I think it's time to reevaluate the term "mainstream." What we have traditionally thought of as "mainstream" no longer applies, because it is now the powers-that-be that CREATE the mainstream, using the overwhelming power of the megamedia monolith to aid and abet them. The shows that one might have thought of as "risky" are anything but, because they are critics-guaranteed, awards-guaranteed, media elite-guaranteed from the outset. Working together relentlessly and inexorably, these forces use their power to impose their will upon the public. Did anyone ever think for a moment that things like Fun Home, Hamilton, or Book of Mormon could ever possibly have gotten a bad review, lost an award, not be hyped to the megamax? Those now ARE the mainstream because the powers-that-be have had the power to make them so.

American Psycho did not benefit from those iron-clad guarantees, and thus falls by the wayside.

[kingfan011]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 12:06pm

Honestly I'm not surprised since American Psycho seems incapable of being a mainstream hit in any medium. While the movie is a cult classic now it was not immediately embraced. And while the novel is finally and deservedly getting respect it deserves by many literary critics that certainly wan't the same when it came out. I feel like the same thing will happen here where it will grown in estimation as time goes on.

[aaaaaa15]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 12:12pm

After Eight said: "Did anyone ever think for a moment that things like Fun Home, Hamilton, or Book of Mormon could ever possibly have gotten a bad review, lost an award, not be hyped to the megamax? Those now ARE the mainstream because the powers-that-be have had the power to make them so.

American Psycho did not benefit from those iron-clad guarantees, and thus falls by the wayside."

Yes, I'm sure many thought that a hip-hop musical about Alexander Hamilton would be poorly received, or a musical about religion that has the ability to offend many subsets of people. The Book of Mormon had a glimmer of mainstream appeal through its creators, but the other two not at all in my opinion. What happened with all three of these shows is that the 'powers that be' agreed with the audience word of mouth. The word of mouth that was occurring before anyone had written a review or given an award.

Updated On: 5/27/16 at 12:12 PM

[newintown]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 12:23pm

"Officially American Psycho appears to only credit the novel as source material with no mention of the film, so technically this is not a film to stage adaptation, but rather a novel to stage adaptation. (Of course, it does pull several images directly from the film, but the screenplay/film are not credited.)"

That's much like the disingenuous (but legally required) claim that A Gentleman's Guide To Love And Murder was not based upon the film Kind Hearts and Coronets, but, rather, upon the source novel Israel Rank, despite the obvious (to those familiar with both sources) fact that the musical had far more in common with the film than the book.

There's always the "Official Statement" and "The Truth," and often those two things are only tenuously connected.

[After Eight]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 12:23pm

Aaa,

Sorry, but I think you need a greater understanding of the way the world works nowadays. 

[aaaaaa15]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 12:32pm

I understand that I enjoyed all 3 of those shows (to varying degrees, BOM significantly less than the other two) and would have even if they had been poorly received by critics or awards. I understand that there are other shows (Billy Elliot, Matilda) that were received very well and I wasn't a big fan of. I understand that there are also shows that me and the critics/awards agree on in regards to not finding them very good (Finding Neverland, Big Fish). 

Before the reviews for American Psycho came out, I don't think anyone thought that it was going to be the next Hamilton, Fun Home or BOM. Although a lot of the reports on here were positive, there were very few outright raves in comparison to those shows. Most openly discussed their criticisms with the show (the writing) whilst also looking at the highlights (the design). I simply don't think AP is comparable to those three shows and I don't think that has anything to do with the reviews or awards.

There is also a difference between those three shows and shows like The Lion King or Aladdin that sell largely because of their names. That is what I mean by mainstream appeal.

Updated On: 5/27/16 at 12:32 PM

[After Eight]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 12:42pm

Aaa,

 

Yes, I know exactly what you meant by mainstream appeal. And I explained to you why that term needs to be reevaluated in light of today's theatre realities.

[aaaaaa15]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 12:44pm

Yes and I explained to you why I don't think it does as I don't think the shows you named had mainstream appeal until they received positive feedback and word of mouth. (I still don't think Fun Home is mainstream).

Updated On: 5/27/16 at 12:44 PM

[sundaymourning6am]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 1:49pm

Has anyone bought TDF tix recently? I'm going next Thursday with a friend and our tix are from TDF. 

[undercoverusher]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 1:54pm

The other poster is correct, Fun Home has themes of sexual abuse.... mainstream kind of show tourists want to see on a Sat night?? Hardly...... Book Of Mormon..... bashes an entire religion in a comical way.... not really mainstream, belive it or not many people do not respect insults to other religions... not mainstream show...... Hamilton..... RAP MUSIC.... and American History... sounds like experimental off Broadway stuff for hip theater goeers, not the main stream Broadway crowd, which are 60%-70% tourists....  

  These shows became successful because of the themes, which critics like. Many, critics, like it or not are totally politically correct.... Fun Home has themes which a critic can  embrace, gay themes and family....  Book of Mormon.. fits the politically left mind of an average critic, who embraces any satire insulting any form of Christianity, it's all over the main stream media.... acceptable and adored.....  criticis ate it up. Hamilton..... I have not seen, but it has the selling point critics would eat up "educaional hip hop".... It's totally PC for the average critic, and the white guilt aspect of the Oscars comes in..... I'm sure Hamilton is wonderful, but this show and other shows are themes the average politically correct culturally left critic would approve of...................  Now American Psycho has everything that was hated in the 80's by main stream movie critics.... Slasher movies.... AP has constant refrences to low budget slasher films...... In the 80's critics wouyld give any film with that kind of theme a bad review, calling them "misogynistic" sometimes without even seeing the actual movie... AP is not a slasher musical, it's deeper than that.... but the essential theme is something totally despised by most critics.... Violence and a throw bsck to the 80's slasher era.

In other words in order for a cutting edge show to get the critical raves, which do HELP make a show a smash hit, it has to be something that is approved by the politically correct world of what is acceptable and what is considered unacceptable. AP, no matter how wonderful a show is, has what the PC trained critic is expected by his/her peers to dislike....  

In other word, politics and the media decide it all 

 

[AnnieBlack]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 1:56pm

It would be great satire to see if all the critics could band together and decide to make a horrible show a hit- see if there is any power of media anymore

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 2:02pm

Why would they do that? The point is so they can tell people what they think is good theater, why would they lie?

Horrible shows are often hits on their own. Without critics. Updated On: 5/27/16 at 02:02 PM

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 2:19pm

After Eight said: "Aaa,

Sorry, but I think you need a greater understanding of the way the world works nowadays. "

After Eight, the pathology of your conspiracy theory existence is showing. Not that it matters to a conspiracy theory addict, but the facts demonstrate nothing to support your theory, which is really just about your fake-y  ego-centrism. It's not a cabal, it is the world that has moved on. You choice was to catch up, or to kvetch. You've made your choice and because of it your opinions are meaningless.

[Broadway Forever2]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 2:53pm

Hamilton came out before the oscarsowhite controversy lol. And Book of Mormon is not politically correct at all. in fact I really dislike the show for its portrayal of Africans and black people is almost minstrel-like and most Africans i know who have seen the show agree think it is pretty racist. Critics raved over that show though. I know people here love American Psycho but for the most part the general audience was ambivalent about it. There was no conspiracy against it. Has it ever occurred to you that critics give good reviews to shows that they personally think are good? I also didn't read a single review that disliked the musical because it was "misogynistic" and "not politically correct"

Updated On: 5/27/16 at 02:53 PM

[Broadway Forever2]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 2:53pm

Double Post

Updated On: 5/27/16 at 02:53 PM

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 3:00pm

^this, except the typos

[Broadway Forever2]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 3:12pm

HogansHero said: "^this, except the typos

 

"

Yeah I'm sorry in general for my typos. I'm always typing on my phone/I have crappy internet/I have big fingers/I am terrible at spelling. I'm working on it. 

[SweetLips]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 3:18pm

Mr Roxy said: "The comparison is that it seems to be that when in doubt transfer a full-length cartoon movie to the stage. The fact that people continue to buy it instead of trying something different escapes me. Cannot fault Disney . As long as people keep eating it up, they will keep churning it out. Does not reflect well on the theater going public. Moral of the story is just appeal to the lowest common denominator and you will be fine.

 

Yet another silly comment from 'he who must comment on every thread'.

The moral is that creative producers try many and varied ways to entertain the public[and to make a profit] and some just by law of averages fail,  but they ALL need to be encouraged for keeping ALL forms of entertainment out there for ALL the people.

 

SL

 

"

 

[After Eight]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 3:23pm

"It would be great satire to see if all the critics could band together and decide to make a horrible show a hit- see if there is any power of media anymore"

 

Annie,

Where have you been? Just look around: Book of Mormon, Spring Awakening, Fun Home, Once, Hamilton, The Humans... Not to mention those that nearly were pushed into the profit column: Sweeney Todd, Sunday in the Park With George... The preview audiences absolutely hated those two. I know --- I was there! Had it been up to the audience, both would have closed in a week. But, no, the critics hyped them, the media kicked in, and the award-givers took it from there. And the paying customers? Out of luck --- and their hard-earned cash.