Can AVENUE Q beat WICKED? Your thoughts...- Page 3

[leomaxfrank]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 12:30pm

Tesori's score supercedes ANYTHING new this season, and I sure hope it's recognized - aka by WINNING!

Interesting question: When is the last time something got 10 Tony noms (or just the most that particular season) and did NOT win the most awards? - i'm hoping for some upsets!!

[DefyingGravity2]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 2:20pm

Avenue Q is a cheap, tacky production not befitting Broadway in the least. Cynicism can make for a few good jokes but it doesn't make for an entire show. This was the biggest waste of my hard earned money in my life. Fool me once Mr. Marx/Lopez... I won't be making the same mistake of spending money on their next juvenile machination.

Wicked, regardless of some minor flaws (Time Dragon set--big deal!) is still a TRUE musical, unlike Avenue Q. I hope Wicked walks away with everything it can and all you little Avenue Q groupies can cry in your micro-brewed beers! I can't wait to see Avenue Q dwindle to nothing and finally wink out as Wicked keeps running and running and running. And the best part is, as a touring production Wicked will run for years whereas Avenue Q as a touring production will definitely not fly with the folks in Peoria. PREDICTION: Avenue Q will be gone in a year.

[ckeaton]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 2:31pm

Wow.
I think someone needs to have a micro-brewed beer of their own.

They are both very good shows. For my money, my heart wants Q to win some awards, (book, especially) but I think Wicked also deserves some serious nods. (sets, music, and musical)

Just because a show isn't brooding or melodramatic at points doesn't mean that it's not befitting of Broadway. Perhaps DG2, the "cheapness" of it will keep it around well after Wicked ceases to be profitable. (i.e. the ladies fly off to the western sky)

[bythesword84]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 2:52pm

CoC didn't beat Avenue Q at the Drama Desks, Avenue Q wasn't eligible...

[wendy72]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 2:59pm

Wow, DefyingGravity2, watch out for falling houses...

[WindyCityActor]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 2:59pm

I really think that the music and lyrics are much better in "Avenue Q," but I think "Wicked" has a better book.

[ckeaton]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 3:09pm

That's interesting WCA, because it's 100% from the usual opinion, or so it seems.

I originally griped about the 'Wicked' book, because I had read, well, the Book. I was suprised to see certain characters changed, and sub-plots left out. It's not the tightest book on Broadway, that's for sure.

I think AQ gets away with more because the puppets and cynicism let you suspend belief more.

For instance, does the crap, abstract Boq storyline work better than the Empire State penny drop? I don't know.

The simplicity of AQ rings true with me, book wise.

[BroadwayBaby3]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 3:21pm

i hope Wicked wins it all

[BroadwayBaby3]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 3:21pm

i hope Wicked wins it all

[directorkid]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 3:39pm

WOW DEFYINGGRAVITY2 U ROCK!! I don't get all this Wicked bashing!?!?!?! I thought Wicked was one the top six B-Way shows i've ever seen (the others being The Lion King, The Producers, Seussical, Movin' Out, and Thoroughly Modern Millie)! Idina and Kristen deliver two of the most amazing theatrical performances i've ever seen. and Stephen Schwartz Marx and Lopex wish they had wrote. Winnie Holzman's book is far supieror to Whitty's. Although Avenue Q is good and cute, Wicked is a full blown masterpiece! I did my fighting for Wicked!

[HunterFosterIsMyGod]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 3:43pm

Avenue Q is a cheap, tacky production not befitting Broadway in the least. Cynicism can make for a few good jokes but it doesn't make for an entire show. This was the biggest waste of my hard earned money in my life. Fool me once Mr. Marx/Lopez... I won't be making the same mistake of spending money on their next juvenile machination.

shut. up. seriously. DO NOT BASH ANYTHING LIKE THAT. if you knew 1/2 a thing about Avenue Q, you wouldn't be saying that. have you even SEEN Avenue Q!?!?

[bythesword84]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 3:43pm

I'm still confused as how saying one show deserves an award more than another show constitutes "bashing."

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 3:45pm

Wow, DefyingGravity2, that's quite a um... strong... statement.

I may be rooting for the underdog here, but at least I didn't completely bash the other show. Geez. And no bythesword, saying one show should win over another isn't bashing. Saying that a show is "cheap" and "tacky" IS.

And IMO, Avenue Q, while containing some raunchy humor that's not appreciated by all, is very smart and sincere. It's honest, and deals with real issues. And to keep the peace, like I said in my other post on this thread, the two are so different that it seems really difficult to compare them. For the record, even if Q does close before Wicked, at least it won't run forever and ever and ever and ever because it's just oh-so fabulous that it becomes old and tired like so many other shows. Big and elaborate isn't always better. Open your eyes.

*ducks under desk*

Updated On: 5/19/04 at 03:45 PM

[dry2olives]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 3:52pm

I'd just like to see them go back to the days when the Tony for Best Musical would go to the authors, along with the producers. Just like it is for Best Play. A musical is what fills the blank pages. That's what remains long after the Broadway production closes.

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 3:58pm

Although I enjoyed the night in the theatre very much, I would have a VERY hard time voting AVE. Q 'Best Musical'. It was cute and fun and, at times, shocking...but never more than an extended parody. I know people defend the score, saying the songs intentionally sound like SESAME STREET songs. But in the end, it wasn't enough for me.

As for WICKED's book, I've actually made a reversal. I read WICKED years ago, then saw the show this past year and, like everyone else, cried foul at the cuts and changes to the story. But just last week, I picked up the book again for a re-read, and ya know what? There's NO WAY you could make that source material into a musical as it was. Not even the brilliant Mr. Sondheim. I now give a lot of credit to Winnie Holtzman and Co. for creating a workable story out of it...even if I didn't like the show as a whole (GOD IT WAS UGLY TO LOOK AT!)

Posted: 5/19/04 at 4:21pm

Ok, DefyingGravity2, no. We can't go bashing other musicals, if we expect to be treated the same way. I know that sounds very after-school-speical, but it's true. Avenue Q has every right to be on Broadway as much as Wicked does. It is also a very delightful show, but that's just my opinion. I'm really pulling for John to win Best Actor. Yes let's all agree: Wicked and Avenue Q are both good shows that are to different compare, and when it does come down to it, awards do not matter all that much. Can't we all just get along?

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 4:25pm

Cheno,

I might not have taken as strong a stance and used the words that DefyingGravity2 used, but why do we all have to agree that both or either are good shows?

Posted: 5/19/04 at 4:33pm

Well, I guess we don't. But I'm just getting tired of all the bashings around here. So maybe i should rephrase it. Let's just all understand that some people DO like Wicked and some people DO like Avenue Q, and we should keep the bashing down. I'm not saying don't express your opinon, just try not to do it in such angry terms.

[HunterFosterIsMyGod]

Posted: 5/19/04 at 7:17pm

that's right. we all have our own opinions, but COME ON!

[CallbackKing]

Posted: 5/20/04 at 12:12pm

I'd agree that there IS a difference between "bashing" a show and criticizing it. So, DG2, here's my critical view of why Wicked doesn't hold a candle to Avenue Q, much less the great musicals of the American Musical Theater canon:

1. The book is all over the place and many of the gags/jokes are rather cheap and rely simply on previous knowledge of the Wizard of Oz story line. Put simply, Wicked never really knows what its tone should be. It wants to be cutting and polemical, but because it also stretches to appeal to a mainstream audience so much, it seems to always be in conflict with itself.

2. With the exception of Popular, and arguably Defying Gravity, the songs and music are clunky, obvious, forgettable, and just plain not as good as Avenue Q, or Caroline or Change, for that matter. I've seen the show twice and listend to the cast album, and I still have to skip over the group numbers because they are simply grating, repetitive, and boring. Schwartz is clearly a gifted song writer, and his past shows prove this point, but here, I think he is morbidly trapped by the structure of the show, the need to appeal to a mainstream audience, and perhaps a pressure to give his leading ladies a lot to do.

As for the performances, it has always been my opinion that Idina Menzel, while vocally blessed and immensly talented, still has some work to do when it comes to her acting. Watching her perform Elphaba, Menzel always seemed to step out of character whenever she sang, as if she was performing some concert version of the show. To me, a character breaking into song in a musical must be sustained by some emotional truth to the character and an understanding of what that character is going through at that point on the show. Menzel seems to sing just for the sake of singing well -- go watch Burnadette Peters do Rose's Turn for an example of how to act and sing at the same time. Given, Menzel isn't helped much by Schwartz's songwriting, so I can understand her need to push at certain points in some monotonous songs.

And say what you want about Avenue Q being low-budget or vulgar. It has a solid book with a solid tone and themes. The songs are across-the-board well-written, funny, touching, clever, and memorable. The performances by the entire cast are fantastic, espcially John Tartaglia and Stephanie D'Abruzzo (Rick Lyon and Ann Harada were robbed at the Tony noms). Put simply, it is a great musical for a new generation of musical theater fans.

I look forward to responses to this post :)

[redhotinnyc2]

Posted: 5/20/04 at 12:24pm

CallBackKing - you said it, brother - and How! thanks for summing it up so clearly (though I tend to think Idina is a better actress than you do, but thats just an opinion - I agree that she's given nothing much to work with). Thanks!

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 5/20/04 at 12:49pm

Thank you for that, CallbackKing.

I will be very curious to see how WICKED's box office numbers hold up when Chenoweth & Menzel leave.

[bythesword84]

Posted: 5/20/04 at 12:53pm

Yaaaaaaaaaay Callbackking!

[ckeaton]

Posted: 5/20/04 at 3:02pm

At first I thought Idina wasn't acting very well. Then I realized that Elphaba would be sort of dry and sullen. I think Idina plays Elphaba the way she would be... not grand and gesturing, subtle and melancholy. The singing center (concert-like) is more about the musical staging.

After reading the book, I expected a little more fire... but the fire was contained in the book of the musical.

[wendy72]

Posted: 5/20/04 at 3:09pm

I'd never seen Idina perfom prior to "Wicked". I thought her portrayal of a girl who had basically been rejected by her father and left to feel different from the rest of the world was perfect. She seems cold and emotionally cut off at first, then she allowed her feelings to show gradually throughout the story.
Elphaba was the more sympathetic character and Idina drew me from the first moment she stepped on stage.