Am I the only one that didn't enjoy Spring Awakening?- Page 2

[teka21]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 7:54pm

Yes, let's agree that not every well reviewed show will connect with everyone. Like educator06, I also was left emotionally unaffected and bored by Grey Gardens, despite the fact that it was well acted. I rate Spring Awakening in my top five musicals ever. Those of us who love SA can't get enough of it!

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 7:57pm

"The main part of musicals and Broadway that I like are those jazz-hands, kick-line type of numbers, and SA just doesn't have one of those."

Don't threadjack another SA thread. The songs are supposed to be inner monologues for the characters. Sorry Ashley Brown wasn't in it and it didn't have a kick-line. If you only like big flashy shows you don't really appreciate theater.
Updated On: 1/7/07 at 07:57 PM

[StageManager2]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 7:59pm

I think only teenyboppers liked it.

[snl89]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 8:00pm

Those of us who love SA can't get enough of it!

damn right haha, I swear, if you DO like it, it is SO SO addicting. And I just think its so well crafted. It sounds like such a strange idea at first to have a play taking place in the 1800s combine with modern rock music, but the minute you see it it all fits perfectly. You have this incredibly tense setting and the music is such a release that it makes you appreciate it even MORE.

The only other show I've been to that I wanted to go back sooo much right away was Wedding Singer, and that was just because it made you feel so good.

Updated On: 1/7/07 at 08:00 PM

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 8:05pm

"Those of us who love SA can't get enough of it!

damn right"

Agreed.

[gman07]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 8:06pm

Spring Awakening appeals to all age groups, in fact, I would bet that the over 60 crowd likes this show as much as the teenyboppers, maybe more.

[D2]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 8:06pm

Well, it's not WICKED. And that's a good thing.

I saw SA last night and I loved it. I saw GREY GARDENS this afternoon and left thinking "Is that it? Hmmm."

Different strokes.

[wickedfiyeroofoz]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 8:40pm

"I think only teenyboppers liked it."
Um no. I don't think all of the reviewers were teenyboppers. I think the show is fantastic in every sense of the word. Beautiful subtleties. :)Its a different kind of Broadway, and I love it.

[pab]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 8:59pm

I had a friend who saw it at Atlantic. He said that had he known that I was going to see it on Broadway he would have advised me spend my money on something else.

However, I'm glad that I did get to see it, mostly because of all of the hype surrounding it. I found it to be quite overrated and not nearly as brilliant as many people were saying it was. And, by the way, I don't dream about it at all.

I enjoyed some of the music but I did not care for any of the characters. I think that they tried hard for shock value with the masturbation number and the sex scene but I found that to be much ado . . .

I will not try and discourage anyone from seeing it but I see no reason for me go back and see it again.

[eb412]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 8:59pm

i think people are just craving something with a little more originality. i know its an adaptation of a play but it done have many unique elements. it also happens to have a very current and relatable score. I love the bitch of living but admit the rest of the score didnt grab me as much as that song. i think people are happy to see an underdog show get some attention.

[snl89]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:08pm

I enjoyed some of the music but I did not care for any of the characters. I think that they tried hard for shock value with the masturbation number and the sex scene but I found that to be much ado . . .

again,totally just my opinion, but that was one of the things I was personally most impressed by :) Its racy, but there was never really a single time durring the show where I thought they were trying to be explicit just for the shock value. If anything, I'd say maybe they didn't so much need the masterbation scene, but it didn't bother me enough to have an impact on my feelings for the show. But even the sex scene, I thought they handled very well. Did they necasserily need to show it that much in detail? maybe not. But 1)jon and lea did it really well and played it with so much honesty that I didn't think it was raunchy at all. just realistic. and 2)if you look at it purely from a nudity-based stand point, they really didn't show THAT much. Butts and one boob. They may have implied a lot, but its not like it was bordering on porno or anything. And as for all the other edgy/racy aspects of the show, they all had a purpose, so I was perfectly fine with them. With the way people were saying it was so so innapropriate, I was really expecting a lot worse.

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:11pm

"I think that they tried hard for shock value with the masturbation number and the sex scene but I found that to be much ado . . ."

All of this stuff was in the play.

[teka21]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:13pm

The original scenes in Wedekind's play were more sexually explicit.
Far from trying for shock value, the musical was actually toned down for contemporary audiences.

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:17pm

Spring Awakening isn't trying you shock you with a masturbation or sex scene. All of this stuff was in the original play. They are not trying to be "edgy" or racy.
Updated On: 1/7/07 at 09:17 PM

[Vespertine1228]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:22pm

The music is fantastic and the singing was beautiful. The set design was amazing, totally gorgeous.

Everything else was pretty inferior. The book was all over the place. The scenes weren't connected and didn't flow, and I didn't care about anything that was happening.

I actually thought the acting was pretty bad too, from everyone involved. The adult characters were cartoons, and the lead romance was wooden. No amount of musical energy can disguise bad acting.

I saw it right after it opened without knowing much of the press aside from the fact that it was transferring from Off-Broadway. I think now all the heightened expectations have made things worse.

I left the show feeling very lukewarm. I'm still glad I saw it though, always nice to see something different on Broadway. It's just a shame that this show was, for me, such a major letdown.

We'll see how the show does though. I think it has very limited appeal, so it will be interesting to see what word of mouth does once people who've bought tickets because of the reviews see the show en masse. Updated On: 1/7/07 at 09:22 PM

[Lauren_T]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:24pm

Spring Awakening is amazing. It didn't get RAVE reviews for being boring. The music is amazing!!! If you didn't like it you must be blind and/or deaf. I don't get why people need to bash things that are truly new, fresh, and exciting. I bet you will love Legally Blonde!

[antiandrewx]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:26pm

No one is bashing the show or any actors. They're sharing their opinions on what they didn't like about it and so far everyone has been very respectful.

[ashbash1990]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:35pm

I'm a little confused about the book, not having seen it, i was wondering if the book is pretty much the same as the play... if it is, i think that I would really enjoy it, but thats just me...

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:41pm

"I'm a little confused about the book, not having seen it, i was wondering if the book is pretty much the same as the play... if it is, i think that I would really enjoy it, but thats just me..."

Yeah it's basically the except the sex scene.In the musical it's consensual. I haven't seen the show but I have read the play. In the play Melchoir rapes Wendla.

Updated On: 1/7/07 at 09:41 PM

[snl89]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:44pm

No one is bashing the show or any actors. They're sharing their opinions on what they didn't like about it and so far everyone has been very respectful.

they really have been :) thank you everyone for stating your opinions so tactfully, it really means a lot, because it doesn't happen as much as it should on this board!


and I really did think the acting was fantastic. Sure, maybe there were a couple scenes here and there where the ensemble could have been a little bit stronger acting wise, but I truly believe Lea, Jon Groff, and John Gallagher all very much deserve tony nominations. (maybe not wins necasserily, simply because this is a TOUGH year with a LOT of amazing performances. From the sounds of it, its going to be Christine Ebersole for best actress and *hopefully* Raul Esparza for best actor. But thats okay, because I'm sure they fully,fully deserve it, and Lea and Jon have pleeenty of time to earn their tonys for other projects :P they just deserve to be nominated). To me, they were all genuine and open. And they all also have some VERY challenging scenes that require tons of raw emotion- which, imo,they delivered

Updated On: 1/7/07 at 09:44 PM

[gman07]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:47pm

For me, asking the question, was I entertained? Absolutely.
Were the performances good? Yes, very good, all of them. Was I ever bored? Never. Did I like the score? I adored the score. Was it nice to look at? Oh yeah. Will I be going again? Most definitely!

[theaterdude87]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 9:49pm

I loved it...but Lizzya9 haven't you said enough already about SA.

[pab]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 11:09pm

"If you didn't like it you must be blind and/or deaf."

So, now that we've heard from the Mensa Society, I guess that we can all just shut up because that is apparently the only opinion that counts.

[TheHumanTorch]

Posted: 1/7/07 at 11:55pm

immediately after seeing the show i was left a little cold, especially because of the Les Mis ending, but i haven't been able to stop thinking about it for the past few days... all in all i really enjoyed it

however, regarding the music, though it is beautiful and i really enjoyed it, i'm not sure how many theatre projects Duncan Sheik can have in the future, because as good as he is in this one specific genre of music, he really has no other range...

[snl89]

Posted: 1/8/07 at 12:05am

so I have a question to those who were left cold by the show... just because I'm curious. Did you feel like it was the acting that left you cold (like, even if you enjoyed the musical performances, did you find the acting wooden and that's why you couldn't relate to the characters), or just the story in itself? I'm just pondering a bit, because it really does baffle me that so many people either completely connected with it or didn't at all. And I realized, so much of that generally comes from the acting I think. Because, I personally didn't exactly RELATE to most of the characters (with maybe the exception of Moritz a little bit), but I just really really felt for them because they were so innocent. And the more I think about it, the more I realize thats really what made me so connected to the story. So I just was curious if the people who didn't feel anything weren't big fans of the performances acting-wise. Because if the acting is effective to you, I'd think it would be pretty hard to be left cold by the story, you know?

although, I guess there have also been times when I've seen/listened to a show, and known that the performers did a great job, but I just was so indifferent toward the characters themselves that it kind of turned me off. My main example of this is Lippa's Wild Party (and bare in mind this is soley based off of the oobc). I LOVE the music, and I KNOW julia and brian did an awesome job both acting and singing wise, you can totally tell, but I just really dont care about the characters at all. So yeah, I can see that side of it too.

Updated On: 1/8/07 at 12:05 AM