BATMAN: The Musical Still Developing

[CapnHook]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 2:56pm

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2005/09/12/1126377253812.html

[Full Metal Jacket]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 2:57pm

That might not be bad... at Six Flags.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 3:23pm

Wow, that article was depressing.

I understand that Hollywood and Broadway have been trading ideas back and forth for forever, that's not my issue. But that doesn't mean every successful movie should be considered as a potential musical just because someone somewhere can throw some songs in and market it to the movie-going audiences across America.

I agree with Full Metal Jacket, Batman and Shrek musicals sound like cheesy attractions at theme parks. Maybe this makes me a theater snob or whatever, but I just think some of these ideas are going too far.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:05pm

I believe the batman musical has been in the works long before the success of the most recent film version and is going to be *I HOPE* based on the comic books. I would imagine that something a little more tong and cheek a la the Superman musical would be more successful, but if Jim Steinman is writing it, then it probably won't be that way at all...

[worrell4077]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:16pm

There needs to be a line drawn somewhere about what films should have a musical score written and then put on stage. I'm not saying anything bad about a potential Batman musical, but I think that they should just drop the idea.

Batman can't be made into a musical because although there are show that have a dark tone(Sweeney Todd for example) adding music to Batman, would be just like revisting Joel Schumacer's god-awful Batman Forever and Batman and Robin. Batman is best as a straight film and as a brooding avenger.

All I have to say is to just drop the idea of a Batman musical.
________________________________________________________________
"I seek the means to fight injustice. To turn fear against those who prey on the fearful."
-Batman Begins

[inlovewithjerryherman]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:26pm

i actually think it could work.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:35pm

but, see, worrell, it's that kind of attitude that would stop musicals like the producers and the likes from not being produced. a lot of people said no. it's a good movie. leave it alone, but look what happened...

[dotvmike]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:36pm

I think it would/will be a great show if they keep Jim Steinman on board to write the music and have Tim Burton direct, like they were going to have before Warner Bros. pulled the plug after Dance of the Vampires flopped. Hopefully Lestat will do very well and Warner Bros. will want to do Batman. Honestly I didn't think it work either but I heard a song Steinman had composed for the show. It was supposedly a duet for Batman and Catwoman...and it is amazing. If/when the show is made I will definately be there waiting on line for tickets.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:38pm

Actually, I think it would only work as a camp parody of the cheesey television series. Beyond that, I just don't see how this could work.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:39pm

I don't think it would work at all. The idea of this masked hero belting out some show stopping tune just doesn't seem right. I dont like the idea of a Shrek musical either, I don't see that working too well.

[ScubaSteve]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:44pm

"There needs to be a line drawn somewhere about what films should have a musical score written and then put on stage."

I'm sorry, I'm going to go into p!$$ed off mode here. Who cares if they take a movie and turn it into a musical? I keep hearing this argument over and over again, and in my mind, the argument makes little to no sense. Condemn something if you must after they've made the attempt to turn it into a show, even though condemning something like that at any point along the way often comes off as elitist. If it really bothers you that much, just don't see it. What else can you do? Complain about it on a message board? I heard none of this chatter for Light in the Piazza, and that was both a movie and a book. Talk about an unoriginal idea: they had two sources to go off of to create that. And maybe I'm being ignorant; maybe they did change the story around a lot, I haven't read the book, I don't know.

Simply put, are you really trying to say that anything unoriginal shouldn't become a show? I understand you're talking about what you think is a bad idea, not simply that any movie shouldn't become a musical. But just because you think it can't work (and when I say you, I'm not referring to any one person in this thread, I'm referring to anyone who has had this idea), does that mean that A) it has no redeeming value whatsoever and B) you won't end up listening to/enjoying the show or recording ever??? I really apologize for the ranty appearance of this message and I may end up regreting the fact that I posted it about fifteen minutes afterwards, but still, I don't understand the argument at all, and it all comes off as elitist to me. If you want to see better quality musicals, then you write them, don't expect someone you have no control over to think "Hmm... maybe they're right" and change everything.

Ugh, sorry again, hope none of you take this the wrong way.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 4:47pm

well, if anything unoriginal shouldn't become a show then were left with like... five musical...

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 5:08pm

I agree. I like "orignal" musicals, but at the same time I don't mind jukebox musicals or musicals based off pre-existing sources. Fact is, its never going to stop. I just wish they wouldnt make EVERYTHING into a musical. I don't think "Weekend at Bernie's" is screaming to be made into a musical. I think composers should write something out of creative drive. Like, they should feel a need to write that movie or book into a musical, rather than Warner Bros coming up to them and being like "hey, take this crappy movie, throw in some tunes, and lets throw it up on Broadway and see how it goes."

[CJWesselman]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 5:30pm

I just think there's a HUGE difference between taking a source material that you thought would make a good musical (ie Light in the Piazza) and doing it for art's sake as opposed to a group of guys at Disney going, "Hey, you know how we could make a ****load more money and Disney-fy Broadway even more? Let's make a ****ing "Little Mermaid" musical....it'd be a ****ing cash-cow." They don't want to make a Batman musical or a Shrek musical or a Tarzan musical because they think it's good material to transfer over well or that they want to make a good show, they simply want to do it to make money. Granted, some might make the same argument for a show like The Producers, but Mel Brook's love and devotion to theatre is clear and recognized, the money he makes is simply a wonderful bonus. These shows aren't about the love of Theatre or the progression of theatre, it's about making as much money as you can off an idea that's already proved itself as a winner at the movie theatres. There's bound to be exceptions, but for the most part all companies like Disney are in this to do is make as much money as possible, even if that means undermining the entire Theatre community. I mean, geez, the Tarzan movie is, what, less than 10 years old?? It wasn't even a great movie! lol

Scuba does makes an excellant point, though, in that we can't judge the quality of these shows before we actually see them. Many people knocked (and still do) The Producers big time, saying it would be horrible and a big one-note joke, but that turned out to be a great success and a very entertaining show. I just despise these up-and-comers simply for the rapid, almost factory-like production which they go through. Granted the business of the business is to make money, but at what point do you just totally throw the love of Theatre out the window? How long before Broadway gets totally Hollywood-ized?

Or are we already too late?

I for one, despite how incredibly impossible it is, pray every day for a return to what Broadway was like in the Golden Age. We would be so lucky.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 7:15pm

I'm sorry, I'm going to go into p!$$ed off mode here. Who cares if they take a movie and turn it into a musical?

I don't care if they take some movies and make them into musicals, there's plenty of examples of good shows that came from that movies. I just think they should be more selective in choosing which movies would work as musicals. Batman centerstage in tights and a cape belting out showtunes would make any Batman fans cringe, and normal audiences laugh. DC Comics would not want their "Dark Avenger" to be a comedian, but it will inevitably end up that way.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 7:44pm

I agree. I don't mind if they make movies into musicals, but they need to have some kinda set standard. I mean the next thing you know we're going to have "Meet The Parents: the musical" or "Scream 3: the musical."

[ScubaSteve]

Posted: 9/13/05 at 9:16pm

There have been plenty of odd premises that have made for wonderful musicals.

Parade: Who the hell looks at the story of Leo Frank and thinks, "Hmm, murder, pedophilia, lynching... definite musical material." But it is hands down my favorite musical.

Batboy: Talk about a show who's plot is totally FUBAR. If you have problems thinking about Batman belting out a showstopper, think of Batboy's "Let Me Walk Among You." And it must have worked, because, from my best estimation, the thing is a cult hit.

Sweeney Todd (if I get something wrong here, please understand I am Sondheim-illiterate and have not seen this show or heard a recording): If this show never happened, and someone walked up to you saying "I have this great idea for a musical: it's focused on this mad barber who slits people's throats and this woman who uses the dead bodies and puts them into pies. What do you think?" I have twenty bucks on people using the same logic to dismiss that totally out of hand.

Carousel: In a time of happy-go-lucky musicals like Oklahoma, Guys and Dolls, and Annie Get Your Gun, this mindblowing tragedy comes out. We went from dancing cowboys to suicide plots. But if you build a top-three listing of Rodgers and Hammerstein shows, I'd put money on Carousel being included most of the time.

I could go on.

The point is, wierd concepts don't make for bad shows. Do not put ideas like Batman or Shrek in the context of an Oklahoma and the like. Yes, if they were in that context, they wouldn't work, but I doubt MGM or whoever's got the rights to the Batman musical would stand Batman center stage, make him pull an Alfred Drake and sing "The Batmobile With The Fringe On Top" to Catwoman.

I'm not a fan of Lion King. Some of the songs ("Chow Down" and "Morning Report") feel forced in my opinion. But it still has redeeming qualities. The scenery and costumes are eye-catching, and it entertains. So what if it doesn't make you think? Who wants to think all the time? There has to be some straight up entertainment sometimes. And not just because that sells, but because we need to be entertained just as much as intellectually challenged; we can't expect to stifle ourselves, because that's what would kill theater, not the influx of "movicals".

You know what else kills Broadway? The shunning of ideas, no matter if they are unoriginal or seem trite. Because it still takes some sort of creativity to write songs for recycled ideas. Even if it seems like its just for a quick buck, there still has to be some creative element in translating a show from a novel or the screen to the stage.

[rockfenris2005]

Posted: 9/29/05 at 8:08am

Batman is not what you think it is, believe me.

It is like Threepenny Opera!

I have heard and seen many many musicals in my life - and htat one had the most beautiful song I have ever heard

I can't wait for the day that Batman opens

[TFritz13]

Posted: 9/29/05 at 8:25am

A movie musical is much better then these juke box musical crap. Mamma Mia aside these musicals need to go.

[EddieVarley]

Posted: 9/29/05 at 8:32am

'Not Allowed to Love' the duet for Catwoman and Batman from the BATMAN project, has the single most romantic and soaring melody I've heard in the last ten years.

[rockfenris2005]

Posted: 9/29/05 at 9:13am

that’s the one I’m talking about, Ed!

Thanks for mentioning it. You know I could sit here for forty weeks, straight, and promote the work of Jim Steinman. Everyone thinks he’s some pop composer or rock producer (or Meat Loaf’s buddy), but there’s a whole other side to him that no one sees. Not even Warner Bros. which he was bound to prove wrong.

Steinman was born in New York, and raized among classical and musical family. He is more like Andrew Lloyd Webber than you realize. He attended Amherst College where he worked on scores of Brecht and Shakespearian shows. He scored A Man’s A Man, Baal (with Stephen Collins from 7th Heaven!), A Good Woman of Setzuan; all these influential shows. His colleague and best friend Barry Keating directed Threepenny Opera with Stephen Collins and Steinman. His first major musical was THE DREAM ENGINE, a three-hour rock / musical sensation with killer nuns and a 55-minute nude sequence. It defied barriers where HAIR wouldn’t dream to go. I have been told (and who wouldn’t believe it) that the possibilities of theatre, had this of been done, would be endless. Joe Papp wanted to produce the work on Broadway, and Steinman became his protégé. The show never happened but Jim worked for him for years and years.

Jim was influenced by the likes of Brecht, Wagner and Antonin Artaud; combined with the work of Grotowski and Jim Morrison. Jim worked with the likes of Thomas Babe and Christopher Walken (KID CHAMPION), Michael Weller (astonishing playwright) on MORE THAN YOU DESERVE: more than just the meeting turf of Meat Loaf and Steinman. Not to mention Ray Errol Fox, who’s musical should have opened the Minskoff Theatre, and one of Broadway and Hollywood’s most respected veterans and many more. He forged a bizarre form of theatre, from his influences, that would aim to revolutionize the Musical. But he has suffered many setbacks.

Some of his early shows include the quirky RHINEGOLD with Andre DeShields, Jessica Harper (Phoenix from Phantom of the Paradise and Janet from Shock Treatment) and Mimi Kennedy (from Dharma and Greg) and Craig Richard Nelson; MORE THAN YOU DESERVE; with Fred ‘Herman Munster’ Gwynne, Leata ‘Hair’ Galloway, Mary Beth Hurt, Stephen Collins and (of course) Meat Loaf: who really owes his fame (perhaps) to his discovery in this show; not to mention the defiant KID CHAMPION (anyone here remember that show?) and the cabarets BLOODSHOT WINE and etc. Plus there was the third Joe Papp (never staged) triumph THE CONFIDENCE MAN; which was to be staged at the Public Theatre & one point directed by Howard ‘Jud Fry’ Da Silva, starring Len Cariou and Andrea Marcovicci. Remind you of any bats out of hell?

Life didn’t start with Meat Loaf. If you have heard or seen, or even read, the quirky and revolutionary works of Steinman’s career; you’d be open to a Batman the Musical. So would Warner Bros. The song which Eddie mentions reminds me of Steinman’s pre-Loaf days; a combination of Brecht and Rodgers and Hart. He truly has an ‘impossible vision’ which is incredible. And nothing like the studio bombast.

I know I’m saying this as a fan, but I don’t think enough people know what Steinman has accomplished in the theatre. Before Dance of the Vampires, and Meat Loaf, he created one of the greatest selling singles in musical history NO MATTER WHAT (from Whistle Down the Wind); worked with Andrew Lloyd Webber (a long-time friend from the early days), Roman Polanski, Michael Kunze, the list is endless.

It’s a shame that one stupid show had to ruin everything for this talented man.
I mean, Wildhorn had more chances!

And I have NOTHING against him

Updated On: 9/29/05 at 09:13 AM

[rockfenris2005]

Posted: 9/29/05 at 9:35am

ha! wish this had of been a plug for Over the Top!

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 9/29/05 at 10:15am

"They don't want to make a Batman musical or a Shrek musical or a Tarzan musical because they think it's good material to transfer over well or that they want to make a good show, they simply want to do it to make money."

Really? You know this? I didn't realize you knew so many producers and they shared their motives with you. That is AMAZING!!

The saddest thing about this thread is the number of people who believe we should censor what ideas or sources should be produced as a musical. That's real nice, guys. Maybe we should also limit its content to only right-wing conservative Christian values and everyone involved must be heterosexual. Perhaps we should organize a committee that can subjectively judge what should be allowed on Broadway. But we must be sure to include everyone's criteria, just to be fair. I don't want anything produced by stuck-up theatre snobs who believe that anything produced by Disney is not worthy and I don't want any musicals that are favorites of those who want the disappearance of jukebox shows. This is a GREAT idea! You want to kill Broadway, then keep up the elitist snobbery. The shows you hate are the ones that are financially keeping Broadway afloat.

The funny thing about the Batman musical is that I always thought it would make a better ballet than a musical. But then, who knows? It might just be incredibly beautiful and gorgeous. I'll give it a chance. I'm mighty skeptical about Full Metal Jacket simply because I hated hated hated hated the movie with a passion. But unlike others with more closed-minded Communist ideals, I think anyone who has the ability to raise the money and produce a show on Broadway deserves their shot.

Honestly, people!

[rockfenris2005]

Posted: 9/29/05 at 10:24am

Not to be rude or anything, but I think it would be easier (and more worthwhile) to take over the rest of the world than conquer Broadway. It's that big a bitch at the mo

I'm serious