If you can change one things of show that you despise, to make it more appealing to you what would it be? Just one thing, don’t just say “the book.”
In our millions, in our billions, we are most powerful when we stand together. TW4C unwaveringly joins the worldwide masses, for we know our liberation is inseparably bound.
Signed,
Theater Workers for a Ceasefire
https://theaterworkersforaceasefire.com/statement
If one could change a selected attribute of any Broadway show personally despised by one, in order to make the net result increasingly palatable to same, just how might this be achieved? Kindly be both specific and selective. Simply offering "the book", as an example, is thoroughly nonnegotiable.
It would take a lot of reasons for me to despise any single show. Right now, I can't think of any that I despise...
There are some OC albums that I would definitely listen to more often if one element were changed, however. Two that come to mind both feature Lucie Arnaz (They're Playin' Our Song and The Witches of Eastwick).
I've never been a fan of a 'nervous' vibrato. Not that Arnaz isn't a fine actress/singer - her vibrato just isn't appealing to my ear. Bluntly, I find it grating.
I'm in the minority who actually likes PASSION very much. But I find the book mostly extraneous. The OBCR could be staged with a couple of lines for transition and I wouldn't miss a thing.
But that isn't to say I "despise" Lapine's book. (And he gets to share credit for "book" in the abstract sense that includes arrangement of songs.) I just don't find anything essential in his spoken dialogue.
Kad said: "darquegk said: "Make The Addams Family a Shaiman-Wittman show instead of a Lippa one."
Make it an adaptation of Addams Family Values rather than a half-assed You Can't Take It With You ripoff."
I'd prefer the first film (Fester's welcome home/bon voyage party with the waltz leading into the Mamushka would have made a perfect Act 2 opener, and Mary Testa as Dr. Pinderschloss), but yes to Shaiman expanding the work he did on the scores of both movies.
In Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, instead of having all 7 of the women choose to marry their kidnappers at the end of the story, I would revise the book so that all 7 report them to the police as kidnappers and the show would end with the 7 kidnappers going to prison as the heartwarming, uplifting finale song. Of course, the title would have to re-named "Seven Kidnapping Brothers Get Sent to Prison for Kidnapping After Performing Some Amazing Michael Kidd Choreography".
AEA AGMA SM said: "Kad said: "darquegk said: "Make The Addams Family a Shaiman-Wittman show instead of a Lippa one."
Make it an adaptation of Addams Family Values rather than a half-assed You Can't Take It With You ripoff."
I'd prefer the first film (Fester's welcome home/bon voyage party with the waltz leading into the Mamushka would have made a perfect Act 2 opener, and Mary Testa as Dr. Pinderschloss), but yes to Shaiman expanding the work he did on the scores of both movies."
Oh my god, Mary Testa would be perfect as Abigail Craven/Dr Pinder-Schloss. Dana Ivey could've even reprised her role as Margaret Addams, nee Alford.
When I see the phrase "the ____ estate", I imagine a vast mansion in the country full of monocled men and high-collared women receiving letters about productions across the country and doing spit-takes at whatever they contain.
-Kad
TheGingerBreadMan said: "In order to make a show that I dislike become appealing, I would need to change more than one thing."
This is exactly my thought. If I truly despised it, there wouldn't be only one thing to change.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
Not a show I despise but just wanna say: In Hamilton, make Jefferson's character less jokey and lightweight. He comes off as a dunderhead until the final interchanges. It was as if Lin-Manuel could not stand to have anyone be distinguished except for Alexander H. and Washington. Yes Jefferson was a slave owner and probably rapist.. but still..... not a clown.
I'd take a middle path between the two films, keeping the Fester plot from the original while pairing it with the "Wednesday goes to camp" plot from the second. The Debbie Jellinsky plot was a lot of fun, and great high camp, but felt a little bit like a retread of the first film's "Fester is weird, gullible and bizarrely sexually appealing to a certain kind of woman."
I would find Waitress far more enjoyable if the character of Ogie were eliminated or, more adventurously, rewritten in a way to give him a fate more fitting of such a creepy stalker.
I would agree that changing one thing would not fix any musical that one despises. But, in the spirit of the original question, I think Finding Neverland could be greatly improved by adding a proper "I want" song for the lead at the top of the show. Not every musical needs an "I want" song, but this one desperately does because I could never get to grips with Barrie.
The show would still have issues, but it would be a better watch with that establishing moment up front.
Just remembering you've had an "and"
When you're back to "or"
Makes the "or" mean more than it did before
Eliminating/reducing “The Private and Intimate Life of the House” and “Natasha & Bolkonskys” in Great Comet. I’ve pondered and observed EVERY aspect of the show yet still can’t wrap my head on the importance of these two songs, especially the former. Maybe someone can help me out.
Also, cause I apparently have nothing better to do, I read the comments from Isherwood’s NY Time’s review of the show. Goddamn, people really need to grow a pair over the strobe lights thing. I sat on one of the onstage tables and felt nothing about it.
theater_tech said: "Eliminating/reducing “The Private and Intimate Life of the House” and “Natasha & Bolkonskys” in Great Comet. I’ve pondered and observed EVERY aspect of the show yet still can’t wrap my head on the importance of these two songs, especially the former. Maybe someone can help me out."
I don't love those songs myself, and some things about them perplex me too. IMO they don't seem to provide a great lead-in to 'No One Else'; a nasty encounter with a fiance's off-putting family wouldn't lead directly into starry-eyed rhapsodies about the fiance, or not for me anyway. I've only heard the albums, not seen the show, so maybe it makes more sense in context. But if it helps, I also interpret those songs to be about the limited options for women in that time and place. If a woman was too free and expressive about her sexuality, she would be ruined; but if she was too careful and dutiful, like Mary, life would pass her by, leaving her lonely and 'boring'. Natasha doesn't make the wisest choices in the show, but these songs help a little to show that she is somewhat caught between a rock and a hard place. (Of course, the songs are also meant to set up that brief later parallel between Bolkonsky Snr and Andrey, when the latter gets vindictive about Natasha during 'Pierre & Andrey'.)
Regarding other shows: I'd change the ending of 'My Fair Lady'.
I wish that Gypsy act 2 moved faster. Act 1 is perhaps the best written and orchestrated act in any theater I have ever seen, but act 2 is full of forgettable songs and dragged out plot. Wherever we go and Rose's Turn save the act from the space filler You Gotta Get a Gimmick and the dreadfully long Strip scene.
I love Les Mis, but I hate how at the end of Stars the moment is ruined with Gavroche coming on stage and singing randomly for thirty seconds. It sounds jarring and clunky coming out of the end of the song and ruins the dramatic moment that we had for Javert (and also cuts off the applause the song usually gets). Honest to god it feels like it was written to cover a scene change. When it wasn't in the Tenth Anniversary Concert I didn't miss it at all.