Andrew Lloyd Webber's Wizard of Oz? I think not!

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 11/11/10 at 10:50pm

ALW is at it again...note how the bastard positions his billing:

ANDREW LLOYD WEBBER'S (in HUGE letters)

new production (in small letters)

THE WIZARD OF OZ (same size as ALW's name)

Nowhere does it state the songs are by Arlen and Harburg! He is trying to imply that this is HIS show. Well it is NOT!

He tried to pull this same crap when he opened SOUND OF MUSIC in Toronto.

Where does this untalented scumbag get off trying top pull crap like this? And why are we letting him get away with it??

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/11/10 at 11:04pm

I don't think "we" really have much say.

[once a month]

Posted: 11/11/10 at 11:12pm

Wouldn't it be cool if he took a cameo as the Mayor of Munchkinland?? Love to see him in the elf shoes...
Updated On: 11/11/10 at 11:12 PM

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/11/10 at 11:13pm

Where's iflit? We need a color coding, stat.

[husk_charmer]

Posted: 11/11/10 at 11:22pm

Actually, he's writing new songs to go along with the Arlen/Harburg ones. So assuming that there are 15-16 songs, 10 will be by him. (That's lumping all of Munchkinland into one extended number, and counting the If I Only's as one song)

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 11/11/10 at 11:44pm

Isn't that even worse? How is anything he can compose going to fare alongside the classic Arlen tunes?

I'm sensing a disaster of Spiderman-proportions!

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/11/10 at 11:47pm

Where were you when they were showing that concert version with Jewel and Debra Winger on tv all the time? THAT was a tragedy.

[husk_charmer]

Posted: 11/11/10 at 11:52pm

And where have you been for the last year and a half? This was announced back in April of 09, with Glenn Slater attached as lyricist.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 12:31am

I bet he's writing some of the witch's music with Patti LuPone in mind, but will cast Glenn Close if she's available.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 12:43am

What upsets me is the fact that the estates and or rights holders are allowing him to add his own songs. No one should ever be allowed to do that and no one should ever feel like they have any right to add their own compositions to a previously existing musical without permission from the original authors.

Except maybe one time for Andrew Lippa who did a decent job of writing new songs for You're a Good Man Charlie Brown, and obviously Mary Poppins because they had permission.

[husk_charmer]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 12:54am

Why do you assume that the estates have any problem with this? Given when it was created, the Arlen and Harburg estates probably get nothing off of it.

And, even if they do, they're still getting money off of it with ALW's new songs added. Same with any production of the show done now.

This is just like Mary Poppins, excpet (to my knowledge) they aren't excising any of the existing songs.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 2:02am

It's just like Mary Poppins except the original authors aren't alive to give their blessings.

[tourboi]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 4:37am

It's not lying.

It reads, as you said Front Row, Andrew Lloyd Webber's PRODUCTIOn of....

It's his production. He's producing it. It is no different than if the Weissler's chose to, saying THE BARRY AND FRAN WEISSLER PRODUCTION OF CHICAGO.

He's not saying ANDREW LLOYD WEBBER'S WIZARD OF OZ (as he does with PHANTOM, because he wrote it). Two little words in the middle make all the difference.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 10:02am

The fact of the matter is that no show that's ever been performed onstage makes it back to the professional stage in the same shape it was originally, except maybe the Chorus Line revival.

Every Cole Porter revival interpolates songs of his from other shows. Virtually ever revival changes the book, lyrics, songs, etc, from the original version (as I've said a million times, no too professional productions of Cabaret are ever alike).

The Wizard of Oz wasn't even a stage musical first (at least not THIS version) which makes the argument even weaker. I guess there's the argument to be made that the Wizard of Oz is sacrosanct (but even then, don't most stage productions reinstate "The Jitterbug," which was cut from the movie - and the movie seems to be the standard by which we are supposed to judge this), but it's not like these songs of Lloyd Webber's are going to get stuck into the 1939 movie.

If you're making a moral argument (the authors cannot be consulted and therefore their work can never be altered) fine, but legally, there's no argument. Rights either transfer to someone else or the work becomes public domain. In either case, the authors no longer have any say, because they are dead. Gone where the goblins go.


Updated On: 11/12/10 at 10:02 AM

[StageManager2]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 10:06am

... below, below, below your hole!

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 10:09am

That's what I thought the lyrics were when I was a kid!

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 11:09am

"Except maybe one time for Andrew Lippa who did a decent job of writing new songs for You're a Good Man Charlie Brown"

Define "decent". IMO, the songs he wrote for the show didn't fit in with the existing score. "My New Philosophy" was a cute song, but didn't fit. "Beethoven Day" was not that great of a song and didn't fit.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 11:32am

I agree with Goth. And I don't think the additions to the title song were that great, either. "Get on the bus!"

[Sally]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 12:10pm

Lloyd Webber says he will write 6 new songs for the show---He and Tim Rice. Slater apparently got the boot.

"Speaking of his forthcoming additions to a score written for the screen by Harold Arlen, Lloyd Webber said, “Of course all the favorites will be there—‘Over the Rainbow,’ one of the greatest songs ever, ever written. I’m not even going to try to challenge that.”

quote from Broadway.com

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 12:31pm

"Lloyd Webber says he will write 6 new songs for the show---He and Tim Rice."

Won't work unless they completely change their musical style. Their style doesn't fit the existing music.

Dorothy: What's new, little munchkins? I'm new, I wanna say I'm just a little stuck on you.

Monkeys: Wicked Witch, Superstar, why do you ride on that broom so far?

Wicked Witch: I don't know how to catch her, what to do, how to trap her. She's a girl, just a girl.

Auntie Em: Poor, poor Dor'thy sold to be a slave, situation's grave, hey, sold to be a slave.

[musikman]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 1:07pm

That's pretty brilliant Goth.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 1:25pm

THE WIZARD OF OZ, in any of its stage versions, is one of those shows like A CHRISTMAS CAROL that can always be counted on to attract an audience. Probably the only reason he didn't choose A CHRISTMAS CAROL (not a bad idea, in my opinion) is that it couldn't run year-round.

Sir Andrew, your desperation to have your name attached to a hit is showing.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 5:18pm

I'm not sure, but I thought his West End productions of Bombay Dreams and the revivals of Sound of Music and Joseph were all hits as well, weren't they? Highlighting his name as producer, whether on shows he composed or not, is nothing new for Lloyd Webber. Hell, if Oprah can do it, why not him?

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 5:20pm

Every time I open this thread I laugh where it tells us to notice something, but never actually shows us the ad.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/12/10 at 5:22pm

Updated On: 11/12/10 at 05:22 PM