A Chorus Line - changes for Mario? — Page 4
#77
Posted: 4/21/08 at 11:23am
ACL2006, someone on the other thread said so, but all evidence seems to be to the contrary.
ACL changed the time for the Sunday matinee a couple of weeks ago, we just didn't know why.
And seriously, I can't believe anyone here thinks Mario has any power over changes, schedules, etc. Not with a production team that is so notioriously strict.
"Hey little girls, look at all the men in shiny shirts and no wives!" - Jackie Hoffman, Xanadu, 19 Feb 2008
ACL changed the time for the Sunday matinee a couple of weeks ago, we just didn't know why.
And seriously, I can't believe anyone here thinks Mario has any power over changes, schedules, etc. Not with a production team that is so notioriously strict.
"Hey little girls, look at all the men in shiny shirts and no wives!" - Jackie Hoffman, Xanadu, 19 Feb 2008
#78
Posted: 4/21/08 at 11:36am
look.. my point is this. this show affects people so many people SO profoundly in such a way that is unexplainable. when you start messing with the formula in any way shape or form.. i honestly think it takes something away from the dignity of the original work. i'm all for changes when they work.. and when they're appropriate. but in ACL there really is no room for change.
I believe the motto is "If it isn't broke, then don't fix it."
I believe the motto is "If it isn't broke, then don't fix it."
anything you do let it come from you and it will be new.
#79
Posted: 4/21/08 at 12:01pm
"And seriously, I can't believe anyone here thinks Mario has any power over changes, schedules, etc. Not with a production team that is so notioriously strict."
I think that's the point. People just don't understand how a D-list "actor" was able to command so many changes (his placement in the wedge, Nick Adams' new blocking and costume changes) when the production team is so strict. The estate (which produces) doesn't even allow small time productions to NOT use the original choreography, so how is it they will allow these changes for someone who hasn't remotely helped the box office? Theior aquiescence to his demands are what is irritating most people. So it's not out of the realm of possibility that he would demand a time change.
I don't particularly have a problem with them sticking him on stage more...I do draw the line though when they re-costume an actor and stick him in the back because of jealousy (Nick Adams is better built than Lopez, and Lopez didn't like that, despite PalJoey's claims to the contrary); or take the focal point from the show's emotional center (Paul, who gets his moment in the finale) and replace it with a "star" (whether or not that was a Lopez demand or producing team decision is yet to be scene...I'm leaning towards the latter). Shows make small tweaks to show off the talents and capabilities of the actor ALL the time (Clay Aiken in Spamalot is the most recent example). But when that "star" has no talent, it seems ludicrous.
I think that's the point. People just don't understand how a D-list "actor" was able to command so many changes (his placement in the wedge, Nick Adams' new blocking and costume changes) when the production team is so strict. The estate (which produces) doesn't even allow small time productions to NOT use the original choreography, so how is it they will allow these changes for someone who hasn't remotely helped the box office? Theior aquiescence to his demands are what is irritating most people. So it's not out of the realm of possibility that he would demand a time change.
I don't particularly have a problem with them sticking him on stage more...I do draw the line though when they re-costume an actor and stick him in the back because of jealousy (Nick Adams is better built than Lopez, and Lopez didn't like that, despite PalJoey's claims to the contrary); or take the focal point from the show's emotional center (Paul, who gets his moment in the finale) and replace it with a "star" (whether or not that was a Lopez demand or producing team decision is yet to be scene...I'm leaning towards the latter). Shows make small tweaks to show off the talents and capabilities of the actor ALL the time (Clay Aiken in Spamalot is the most recent example). But when that "star" has no talent, it seems ludicrous.
#80
Posted: 4/21/08 at 12:16pm
So making Zach a cute, younger wunderkind who is a bit too big for his britches (!), and jumps up on the stage to ask his nosy questions...
Bennett was 32 when the show opened in 1975 (a younger wunderkind). Mario is 35 years old. How old is Zach supposed to be?
Bennett was 32 when the show opened in 1975 (a younger wunderkind). Mario is 35 years old. How old is Zach supposed to be?
#81
Posted: 4/21/08 at 12:17pm
None of these changes were "demanded" by Mario.
All of them were made enthusiastically by a joint decision of the three people entrusted by MICHAEL BENNETT HIMSELF to watch over the show. So don't blame Mario. Blame:
BOB AVIAN (Director and Original Co-Choreographer)
BAAYORK LEE (Choreography Re-Staging)
JOHN BREGLIO (Producer)
All of them were made enthusiastically by a joint decision of the three people entrusted by MICHAEL BENNETT HIMSELF to watch over the show. So don't blame Mario. Blame:
BOB AVIAN (Director and Original Co-Choreographer)
BAAYORK LEE (Choreography Re-Staging)
JOHN BREGLIO (Producer)
Updated On: 4/21/08 at 12:17 PM
#82
Posted: 4/21/08 at 1:32pm
"None of these changes were "demanded" by Mario."
The costuming change and blocking for Nick Adams was a Lopez demand. Stop kidding yourself. He threatened to walk out of the show. Personally, I would have let him. There hasn't been any noticeable increase in ticket sales due to his presence in the show. It's ready to close, and they are doing everything they can to keep it open. They are delusional if they think Mario Lopez has a marquee name.
The costuming change and blocking for Nick Adams was a Lopez demand. Stop kidding yourself. He threatened to walk out of the show. Personally, I would have let him. There hasn't been any noticeable increase in ticket sales due to his presence in the show. It's ready to close, and they are doing everything they can to keep it open. They are delusional if they think Mario Lopez has a marquee name.
#83
Posted: 4/21/08 at 1:42pm
Blame them. Don't blame him. Had they not wanted to make the changes, they would have refused.
John Breglio is no shrinking violet. He's a shark who fights for Michael's legacy.
Baayork is the person Michael personally entrusted the integrity of the show with.
Bob Avian lived and breathed every creative idea Michael Bennett had for 20 years along with him.
For you people to make Mario a villain here is ludicrous. Mario had no power in this situation. It was all in the hands of those three people.
If you have a problem, you have it with Michael's team.
John Breglio is no shrinking violet. He's a shark who fights for Michael's legacy.
Baayork is the person Michael personally entrusted the integrity of the show with.
Bob Avian lived and breathed every creative idea Michael Bennett had for 20 years along with him.
For you people to make Mario a villain here is ludicrous. Mario had no power in this situation. It was all in the hands of those three people.
If you have a problem, you have it with Michael's team.
#84
Posted: 4/21/08 at 1:46pm
Whether Mario did demand it or not, no one had to say yes. The A Chorus Line brand has thrived for over three decades without him, but Mario has every right to ask for things when he's been invited to join the cast.
If the Big Three decided to say yes, then it's their own responsibility. If they decided on those changes on their own, then it's their responsibility.
"Hey little girls, look at all the men in shiny shirts and no wives!" - Jackie Hoffman, Xanadu, 19 Feb 2008
If the Big Three decided to say yes, then it's their own responsibility. If they decided on those changes on their own, then it's their responsibility.
"Hey little girls, look at all the men in shiny shirts and no wives!" - Jackie Hoffman, Xanadu, 19 Feb 2008
#85
Posted: 4/21/08 at 2:24pm
I don't think that's the point though. Marios demands aside, the problem IS the creative team. They refuse to allow companies around the world to re-stage and rechoreograph the piece because it will ahrm the integrity of the show. But then THEY go ahead and make changes without questions, to appease a fifth-rate "actor." What would they have done if he had demanded that Paul's monologue be removed because it takes attention from him (and now I mean any "name star they might have approached)? Yes that's extreme, but at a certain point enough small minor changes can completely change a show. Now who are they to tell other theater companies that Paul MUST dance the point in the wedge, when they themselves didn't adhere strictly to the staging!
#86
Posted: 4/21/08 at 3:08pm
And that is their right. Not yours.
#87
Posted: 4/21/08 at 3:18pm
Who has said that Mario demanded these changes? I really can't see him placing these demands when he is treading on unfamiliar territory. I can see the producers making changes because they are putting in a name, and his fans may be disappointed in the fact that his stage time is small. Why is everyone blaming Mario for everything? I do not know him, he probably has a very large ego, but Im sure he is doing what has been told to do, and not make demands. Let him be.
#88
Posted: 4/21/08 at 3:39pm
It's true. When I saw the Company Theatre's Teen Conservatory Program do A Chorus Line, this is how they staged one. Each person would step out, take off his hat, and take a bow. They'd be unrecognizable at first but once the hat was off, you recognized that person. And I did not know who was who until they took off their hat...and I had a lot of friends in the cast.
Butters, go buy World of Warcraft, install it on your computer, and join the online sensation before we all murder you.
--Cartman: South Park
ATTENTION FANS: I will be played by James Barbour in the upcoming musical, "BroadwayWorld: The Musical."
#89
Posted: 4/21/08 at 4:07pm
"And that is their right. Not yours."
That's true. But that does not shield them (nor should it) from criticism, particularly when these same people refuse other producers to make changes by claiming to make any changes would harm the show's integrity. It's completely hypocritical, and simply having the power to do that doesn't make it right. Yes, they have the right to make changes, but I have the right to criticize those decisions, much like you have the right to be an apolgist for people who make bad decisions.
"Who has said that Mario demanded these changes? I really can't see him placing these demands when he is treading on unfamiliar territory."
Depends on which changes you are talking about. Whether or not he demanded more time on stage I am not clear about. But he threatened Baayork Lee that he would leave if they didn't cover up Nick Adams and stick him upstage whenever the he and Lopez shared the stage...that came from Lee herself.
That's true. But that does not shield them (nor should it) from criticism, particularly when these same people refuse other producers to make changes by claiming to make any changes would harm the show's integrity. It's completely hypocritical, and simply having the power to do that doesn't make it right. Yes, they have the right to make changes, but I have the right to criticize those decisions, much like you have the right to be an apolgist for people who make bad decisions.
"Who has said that Mario demanded these changes? I really can't see him placing these demands when he is treading on unfamiliar territory."
Depends on which changes you are talking about. Whether or not he demanded more time on stage I am not clear about. But he threatened Baayork Lee that he would leave if they didn't cover up Nick Adams and stick him upstage whenever the he and Lopez shared the stage...that came from Lee herself.
#90
Posted: 4/21/08 at 4:14pm
I don't believe that. You are DELIBERATELY misrepresenting her words.
#91
Posted: 4/21/08 at 5:01pm
"I don't believe that. You are DELIBERATELY misrepresenting her words."
Because you were there and heard what she said...right. Believe what you want. It's a fact. Nick was VERY upset about it.
Because you were there and heard what she said...right. Believe what you want. It's a fact. Nick was VERY upset about it.
#92
Posted: 4/21/08 at 5:20pm
I am challenging your exact words:
he threatened Baayork Lee that he would leave if they didn't cover up Nick Adams and stick him upstage whenever the he and Lopez shared the stage...that came from Lee herself.
You assert that there was a "threat," and that the depiction of it as a "threat" came from "Lee herself."
Are both of those true? Was there indeed a "threat" and did Baayork Lee characterize it that way herself?
he threatened Baayork Lee that he would leave if they didn't cover up Nick Adams and stick him upstage whenever the he and Lopez shared the stage...that came from Lee herself.
You assert that there was a "threat," and that the depiction of it as a "threat" came from "Lee herself."
Are both of those true? Was there indeed a "threat" and did Baayork Lee characterize it that way herself?
#93
Posted: 4/21/08 at 5:31pm
PJ: I am challenging YOUR exact words:
"None of these changes were "demanded" by Mario.
All of them were made enthusiastically by a joint decision of the three people entrusted by MICHAEL BENNETT HIMSELF to watch over the show."
Please explain how you know any or all of this for a fact. How do you know the decision was made "enthusiastically", and how you know all 3 of them felt the same way? And how do you konw Mario made no demands? No assumptions, just facts please.
"None of these changes were "demanded" by Mario.
All of them were made enthusiastically by a joint decision of the three people entrusted by MICHAEL BENNETT HIMSELF to watch over the show."
Please explain how you know any or all of this for a fact. How do you know the decision was made "enthusiastically", and how you know all 3 of them felt the same way? And how do you konw Mario made no demands? No assumptions, just facts please.
#94
Posted: 4/21/08 at 5:57pm
Fair question but all I can say is: Each one of the 3 has veto power. None exercised it. Other than that, I'm afraid I have to take the 5th Amendment.
#95
Posted: 4/21/08 at 6:26pm
threat
–noun 1. a declaration of an intention or determination to inflict punishment, injury, etc., in retaliation for, or conditionally upon, some action or course; menace:
He didn't have to say "I threaten to leave the show." He said, more or less, that he would leave the show if Nick wasn't covered up. The only reson they acquiesced to his absurd demand is the fact that this show will be lucky if it makes it through the summer, and they are desparate to keep it open. Now whether or not his departure is seen as a punishment is in the eye of the beholder. But it is certainly a threat. He doesn't have to tower over her in an aggressive manner to be threatening.
–noun 1. a declaration of an intention or determination to inflict punishment, injury, etc., in retaliation for, or conditionally upon, some action or course; menace:
He didn't have to say "I threaten to leave the show." He said, more or less, that he would leave the show if Nick wasn't covered up. The only reson they acquiesced to his absurd demand is the fact that this show will be lucky if it makes it through the summer, and they are desparate to keep it open. Now whether or not his departure is seen as a punishment is in the eye of the beholder. But it is certainly a threat. He doesn't have to tower over her in an aggressive manner to be threatening.
#96
Posted: 4/21/08 at 6:51pm
So Baayork did NOT characterize it as a threat, correct?
#97
Posted: 4/21/08 at 7:19pm
"So Baayork did NOT characterize it as a threat, correct?"
Now you are being absurd. Whether or not she uttered the word "threat" in no way doesn't make it a threat.
Now you are being absurd. Whether or not she uttered the word "threat" in no way doesn't make it a threat.
#98
Posted: 4/21/08 at 7:35pm
Fosse76, whether the situation involved Lee, Nick, Mario or any combination of the three, whether it was threats, "threats" or none of the above, the fact remains that what PalJoey says is true - had they not wanted to make the changes, they would have refused. End of story.
"Hey little girls, look at all the men in shiny shirts and no wives!" - Jackie Hoffman, Xanadu, 19 Feb 2008
"Hey little girls, look at all the men in shiny shirts and no wives!" - Jackie Hoffman, Xanadu, 19 Feb 2008
#99
Posted: 4/21/08 at 8:03pm
Now you are being absurd. Whether or not she uttered the word "threat" in no way doesn't make it a threat.
No, I'm not being absurd. YOU are being a drama queen. Posting false and misleading assertions as if they were facts.
The truth is: You LIED and there was never any "threat."
STOP using BroadwayWorld to make baseless accusations.
The next one you make may expose Rob and Craig to libel or defamation charges.
No, I'm not being absurd. YOU are being a drama queen. Posting false and misleading assertions as if they were facts.
The truth is: You LIED and there was never any "threat."
STOP using BroadwayWorld to make baseless accusations.
The next one you make may expose Rob and Craig to libel or defamation charges.
#100
Posted: 4/21/08 at 8:42pm
"No, I'm not being absurd. YOU are being a drama queen. Posting false and misleading assertions as if they were facts."
Ridiculous. If he said: "Either you cover him up and put him in the back or I am leaving the show!" or "I don't think I will continue with performing in this show if you don't cover him up." is very clearly a threat. Anyone arguing otherwise is clearly stupid. He informed the creative team that he would leave the show if those demands were not met. That is a threat.
"The truth is: You LIED and there was never any 'threat.'"
Nope. Just because Baayork may not have said "He threatened to leave the show." in those exact words in no way lessens it as a threat.
"STOP using BroadwayWorld to make baseless accusations."
So unless the conversation was uttered into a recording device, that makes it baseless? That's ridiculous. I was there, I heard her say it with my own ears, and after the performance I heard a cast member discussing it with two guys at the stage door (where the actress, not sure which one she is, clearly stated tha Baayork didn't feel like she had a choice because they were hoping he would boost the box office).
"The next one you make may expose Rob and Craig to libel or defamation charges."
Nope, as someone who worked as a prosecutor for ten years that is not possibloe, particularly when statements are true.
"the fact remains that what PalJoey says is true - had they not wanted to make the changes, they would have refused. End of story."
That's a very thin line. For some odd reason, they really believed that Mario Lopez's presence in the show would boost its box office and delay its impending closure. Just because they made the changes doesn't mean they wanted to. The truth of the matter is that they saw Mario's presence in the show as more important than adhering to the show's integrity. But even assuming they gladly made the changes (and they did it grudgingly), it doesn't remove them from legitimate criticism, which is the real issue, not Lopez's demands.
Ridiculous. If he said: "Either you cover him up and put him in the back or I am leaving the show!" or "I don't think I will continue with performing in this show if you don't cover him up." is very clearly a threat. Anyone arguing otherwise is clearly stupid. He informed the creative team that he would leave the show if those demands were not met. That is a threat.
"The truth is: You LIED and there was never any 'threat.'"
Nope. Just because Baayork may not have said "He threatened to leave the show." in those exact words in no way lessens it as a threat.
"STOP using BroadwayWorld to make baseless accusations."
So unless the conversation was uttered into a recording device, that makes it baseless? That's ridiculous. I was there, I heard her say it with my own ears, and after the performance I heard a cast member discussing it with two guys at the stage door (where the actress, not sure which one she is, clearly stated tha Baayork didn't feel like she had a choice because they were hoping he would boost the box office).
"The next one you make may expose Rob and Craig to libel or defamation charges."
Nope, as someone who worked as a prosecutor for ten years that is not possibloe, particularly when statements are true.
"the fact remains that what PalJoey says is true - had they not wanted to make the changes, they would have refused. End of story."
That's a very thin line. For some odd reason, they really believed that Mario Lopez's presence in the show would boost its box office and delay its impending closure. Just because they made the changes doesn't mean they wanted to. The truth of the matter is that they saw Mario's presence in the show as more important than adhering to the show's integrity. But even assuming they gladly made the changes (and they did it grudgingly), it doesn't remove them from legitimate criticism, which is the real issue, not Lopez's demands.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95