#26
Posted: 8/10/14 at 5:12pm
Who said it was a carbon copy? It's clearly not.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory on Broadway? — Page 2
#27
Posted: 8/10/14 at 5:50pm
Charlie could work with a whole new score, the problem is what has been written does not match the 70s movie score. If you are going to write a new score to a beloved story you need to at least match, or better yet surpass what's gone before. Sadly they don't. The only song I liked was vidiots as that's when the show came alive and had some Dahl humour.
They should have done a mix of old and new like poppins, and I actually think stiles and drewe would have been a better team to tackle this show
They should have done a mix of old and new like poppins, and I actually think stiles and drewe would have been a better team to tackle this show
#28
Posted: 8/10/14 at 6:05pm
I'm not a huge fan of "Vidiots," although I do think the lyrics for that song have clever moments. I didn't hate the whole score though. I enjoy "History of Willy Wonka," "It Must Be Believed to Be Seen," and "Simply Second Nature" but some of the songs are clearly just placeholders for songs that were in the film that they decided not to use like "Don'cha Pinch Me Charlie" in which they didn't even bother to find a new moment to musicalize and just wrote a new song for the slot instead of utilizing the far superior song from the film. "Simply Second Nature" is another one where it's just being used in place of "Pure Imagination" from the film since they moved that song to the elevator scene.
#29
Posted: 8/10/14 at 7:41pm
There's such a gaping hole in the score (and show) after Charlie finally gets the golden ticket and THERE IS NO 'I got the ticket' SONG. They could easily have put in the I've Got A Golden Ticket song from the film.
#30
Posted: 8/10/14 at 7:54pm
I agree with you, Tag. Why not just use the Newley-Bricusse score from the movie?
#31
Posted: 8/10/14 at 8:00pm
The Dahl estate do not approve of the film. It took literally years to convince them to allow Charlie and the Chocolate Factory to use it in the West End. There was no chance of getting anything more from the film in. A new score had to be written for the production to allow it to happen.
#32
Posted: 8/10/14 at 9:02pm
I know of companies that have done stage productions based on the 1971 movie, complete with the entire Newley-Bricusse score (which is excellent, BTW.) The "Willy Wonka" film is quite superior to the other versions.
#33
Posted: 8/10/14 at 9:40pm
But those weren't new West End productions. I was told about the difficulties the Dahl estate created by one of the shows creatives. If they wanted the rights to do the show in London, they had to go along with what the estate wanted.
#34
Posted: 8/10/14 at 10:09pm
But isn't Warner Bros. one of the producers of the stage show? And don't they own the movie as well? Couldn't they just say, "We're adapting our movie for a stage show" ?
#35
Posted: 8/10/14 at 11:00pm
"But isn't Warner Bros. one of the producers of the stage show? And don't they own the movie as well? Couldn't they just say, "We're adapting our movie for a stage show" ?"
It would all depend on what the original contract between Warner Brothers and Dahl included. If they didn't include future adaptation rights then they would indeed have had to go back to the Dahl estate.
What I do find interesting is that there are several accounts that state Dahl was so upset by the changes they made during filming that he never saw the completed film. So it sounds to me as if his dislike of the film was more out of spite that changes were made without his consent. With both films out now I still feel that the film starring Gene Wilder captured the spirit of the book far better than the more literally faithful Burton/Depp adaptation, which felt cold and heartless to me (though I do really like Danny Elfman's musical settings of the original Oompa-Loompa songs from the book).
It would all depend on what the original contract between Warner Brothers and Dahl included. If they didn't include future adaptation rights then they would indeed have had to go back to the Dahl estate.
What I do find interesting is that there are several accounts that state Dahl was so upset by the changes they made during filming that he never saw the completed film. So it sounds to me as if his dislike of the film was more out of spite that changes were made without his consent. With both films out now I still feel that the film starring Gene Wilder captured the spirit of the book far better than the more literally faithful Burton/Depp adaptation, which felt cold and heartless to me (though I do really like Danny Elfman's musical settings of the original Oompa-Loompa songs from the book).
#36
Posted: 8/11/14 at 12:46am
I think part of the show's problem is that it has a hard time balancing out the telling of the story with the audience's knowledge of the story. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is so intensely ingrained in the public consciousness that you could present it on pageant wagons. It's why act one seems so long, we all know what's coming and we all want to get there as quickly as possible, so anything that's remotely unsurprising seems twice as dull. Conversely, the second act whips by because they've eaten up so much time with the first act that they have to kill off the kids in what's essentially a montage before laboring over the ending. I don't know what influence Matilda had on Charlie, but while I appreciate the dark humor brought to this version, it's damaged by something Matilda is free of - a simple, two-part, almost ritualistic structure that the entire world knows by heart (and a much weaker score).
#37
Posted: 8/11/14 at 3:11am
Perhaps they would do better to introduce the children in a montage and thereby get to the factory midway through Act 1.
#38
Posted: 8/11/14 at 3:17am
Not even a rewrite could save this, they would need to throw away everything and start from scratch, the whole thing is dull, it lacks magic, no matter when they arrive in the factory, this production was lifeless. the sooner it is buried in the flop pile, the better!
Well I didn't want to get into it, but he's a Satanist.
Every full moon he sacrifices 4 puppies to the Dark Lord and smears their blood on his paino.
This should help you understand the score for Wicked a little bit more.
Tazber's: Reply to
Is Stephen Schwartz a Practicing Christian
#39
Posted: 8/11/14 at 3:44am
Yes. Leslie Bricusse told me Dahl hated the film so much he said that no future versions of it were allowed to have anything to do with that version. So - there you go.
Nick Hutson
Co-Presenter/Producer
MusicalTalk - The UK's Musical Theatre Podcast
http://www.musicaltalk.co.uk
#40
Posted: 8/11/14 at 4:34am
I know P.L. Travers pretty much felt the same way about the Mary Poppins movie, but before her passing Cameron Mackintosh was able to convince her that a stage musical could never be successful without utilizing at least some of the songs from the film. I feel like the same is true here too but he's unfortunately not around to hear the argument.
Updated On: 8/11/14 at 04:34 AM
#41
Posted: 8/11/14 at 9:15am
According to the book, "Pure Imagination: The Making of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory", Dahl's screenplay was literally just taking his book and plopping it onto the screen. "You can't shoot the book. When we received the first draft of Dahl's screenplay, we realized that we had quite a bit of work ahead of us. His screenplay timed out to a two and a half hour movie....Above all there was no drama in Charlie's victory. He won the prize simply because he made it through the day without causing trouble. We realized many changes were necessary if a successful movie was to be made."
Dahl was probably one of those authors who was disgruntled that the film is not a literal adaptation of his book. But the fact is, the movie WILLY WONKA actually improves Dahl's narrative.
Dahl was probably one of those authors who was disgruntled that the film is not a literal adaptation of his book. But the fact is, the movie WILLY WONKA actually improves Dahl's narrative.
#42
Posted: 8/11/14 at 11:18am
Just mount Willy Wonka on stage.
#43
Posted: 8/11/14 at 2:11pm
There is no Chocolate Factory without Gene Wilder..... Sorry, but I doubt it could be any better than that film was.
#44
Posted: 8/11/14 at 2:16pm
We're ignoring the fact that MTI licenses a version with the film's score, plus some additional song, and a book that's slightly closer to the novel, which you'd think would be what the Dahl estate wanted. (They also have it in Broadway Junior, KIDS, and TYA flavors.)
Roald Dahl's WILLY WONKA"
Roald Dahl's WILLY WONKA"
Formerly gvendo2005
Broadway Legend
joined: 5/1/05
Blocked: After Eight, suestorm, david_fick, emlodik, lovebwy, Dave28282, joevitus, BorisTomashevsky, Seb28
Broadway Legend
joined: 5/1/05
Blocked: After Eight, suestorm, david_fick, emlodik, lovebwy, Dave28282, joevitus, BorisTomashevsky, Seb28
#45
Posted: 8/11/14 at 2:24pm
g.d.e.l.g.i., I've seen that version in a decent production and the problem is that when you just throw a movie onstage, you end up with the problem that it can never be as good as the movie was despite its similarities, and the whole thing lacks drama and is in general, a disappointment. Not to say that the version in London is good, but I think it works better dramatically if only because it is original.
Anything regarding shows stated by this account is an attempt to convey opinion and not fact.
#46
Posted: 8/11/14 at 2:26pm
And because it's too original, it won't sell in America. 'Tis what it is.
Formerly gvendo2005
Broadway Legend
joined: 5/1/05
Blocked: After Eight, suestorm, david_fick, emlodik, lovebwy, Dave28282, joevitus, BorisTomashevsky, Seb28
Broadway Legend
joined: 5/1/05
Blocked: After Eight, suestorm, david_fick, emlodik, lovebwy, Dave28282, joevitus, BorisTomashevsky, Seb28
#47
Posted: 8/11/14 at 2:37pm
It takes too long before they go into the factory. That's what people want to see. "If Your Mother Were Here" is a sweet song but it drags Act one down. They need to spend more time in Act 1 at the factory. The tunes I do miss are the Oompa Loompa songs. If they can do just one of those, then the rest of the new Oompa Loompa songs are fine as they are. At least they were able to get Pure Imagination in.
#48
Posted: 8/11/14 at 3:24pm
I don't understand why they put the song "Pure Imagination" in the stage version. If you are going to do a whole new take, then do it. Using that one song just brings back the memory of that older and better version of the story, which you'd think they'd want to avoid!
#49
Posted: 8/12/14 at 11:36am
Also 'if your mother was here' gives the impression she has died, plenty of the audience the night i saw it thought she has died at first
#50
Posted: 10/15/14 at 5:01pm
In his newest interview on BWW, Marc Shaiman says that CATCF is "most definitely coming to America" and they are currently working on the changes.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95