rattleNwoolypenguin said: "Can someone enlighten me, and forgive me if I sound snarky here
Why on god’s green earth should I be excited for ANOTHER god damn Cinderella with a “twist on an old tale”?
like is this actually good? Is this over the top good? Has a real case been made by Andrew Lloyd Webber why we need to explore this property again?
I’m genuinely curious. If you aren’t tired of seeing this story adapted in a million ways then what is pulling you into being pumped for this?"
Well, as perhaps the Cinderella story's biggest fan, I can say for me at least, I would rather see a zillion traditional versions of Cinderella all different by varying degrees, and I don't fully like everything in Lloyd Webber's more twisted Cinderella, but I like most of it, especially most of the music, which is rather beautiful in some places. I just wish it had the magic of the traditional story. They keep saying it's a fairy tale within the show, yet the Godmother has no magic and is a plastic surgeon! Other than that, I like it. It has some social commentary on beauty and what people do to be accepted or even loved, it has a nice relationship between the leads, and pretty good, sometimes quite funny dialogue, thanks to Oscar winner Emerald Fennell.
Call_me_jorge said: "Cinderella is public domain. This is not Disneys Cinderella this is ALWs Cinderella. It’s like how Rodgers and Hammerstein have their own Cinderella. Had ALW directly ripped off Disney’s Cinderella I’m sure there would be issues, but he doesn’t. As long as it’s inspired from Grimm Brothers Cinderella, there isn’t really an issue."
Actually the version of Cinderella both Disney's and Andrew Lloyd Webber's versions are based on is Charles Perrault's, which was written before the Grimm's. That's the one that invented the glass slippers and fairy godmother.
Updated On: 1/28/22 at 01:25 AM